MSU

LIBRARIES

 

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
Place in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES wi11
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped be1ow.

 

 

¢._

 

0“

“V1.9:
$22 9*

 

NORKERS' RESPONSE TO WORKPLACE ORGANIZATION:
A STUDY OF THE DIRECT CARE STAFF IN A
FACILITY FOR THE DEVELOPHENTALLY HANDICAPPED

By
Tuliio Caputo

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fuifillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Sociology

1984

(:)Copyright by
Tuliio Caputo
1984

ABSTRACT
NORKERS' RESPONSE TO WORKPLACE ORGANIZATION:

A STUDY OF THE DIRECT CARE STAFF IN A
FACILITY FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY HANDICAPPED

By
Tullio Caputo

This study focusses on the direct care staff of a large facility for
the developmentally handicapped. These workers were selected for study
since they are representative of a growing number of lower level, white
collar workers in the labour force. For the most part, these workers
are young, well educated women, who have had little previous work
experience. They occupy a position at or near the bottom of the
organization's white collar work force and perform their jobs mainly in
accordance with a set of predetermined procedures. These workers are
left with little opportunity to use their own initiative or to make their
own decisions.

.The particular configuration of demands and expectations which
characterizes the work situation of these employees reflects the
problems and contradictions which currently exist in the workplace.

These types of white collar jobs were initially heralded as a means of
eliminating the drudgery and monotony of heavy, dirty assembly line
work and were seen as a means for ending alienation. This promise,
however, has gone unfulfilled for many of the new white collar workers,
and especially those in the types of jobs being examined here. The
current period of economic recession has exacerbated the problems in
the workplace and this, in turn, has lead to a renewed interest in both

the concept of alienation and the "quality of working life". TheSe

Tullio Caputo

constructs represent the basis for this investigation.

Interviews were conducted with two hundred and sixty Residential
Counsellors and their perceptions of need satisfaction at work were
examined. It was anticipated that workers who perceived greater
autonomy and control at work would also be more likely to experience
greater satisfaction of their higher order needs, have more positive
orientations to work and be more cooperative and less instrumental or
confrontational at work.

The results obtained in this study indicated that the satisfaction
of higher order needs was strongly related to the workers' perception
of the amount of autonomy or control that they exercised at work. The
satisfaction of basic and social needs by contrast , was less strongly
related to these factors. In addition, the satisfaction of higher
order needs was also found to be strongly related to both positive
orientations to work and to positive behavioural responses by these
workers.

The implications of these results are consistent with both the
concept of alienation employed in this study as well as with the
formulations of the advocates of the "quality of working life". It
was shown that higher order need satisfaction is greater when people have
the opportunity to be autonomous and to exercise control at work. This
finding is particularly significant if we are to construct the types of
work organizations which are effective and efficient and at the same time
provide people the opportunity to grow and develop as human beings by

using their skills and abilities at work.

To Mary Anne, Christine and Emily

ii

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank Janet Case and Dan Bullard for their enthusiasm
and support in the early stages of this project. They helped make this
study a reality. In addition, I would like to thank all the people at the
Centre who assisted in making this research a very rewarding experience.

Throughout this project, the words of my teacher and friend
Seymour Faber kept ringing in my ears. This was at once inspiring and
frustrating but it always encouraged me to keep asking questions and to
do my best. I will always be grateful to Seymour for being my "sociological"
conscience.

Most people have only one thesis committee chairperson. I was
fortunate enough to have two. Both Bill Ewens and Bill Faunce have been
there for me whenever I have needed them. Their understanding and support
have made doing this dissertation a much more enjoyable task. Their ideas
and suggestions echo throughout these pages and both have had a tremendous
impact on how I think about and make sense of the world. This project
cound not have been completed without their constant support and I am deeply
indebted to them both.

I am grateful to the other members of my committee, Professors
Kevin Kelly and James McKee for their help and cooperation.

Special thanks to my friends on the faculty at the University of
Manitoba who have stood by me during the writing of this dissertation.
They have all shared in the "birthing" pains and their friendship has

served to make this experience a little easier.

As alwa.vs,mv parents Michele and Linda Caputo, continued to be a
source of strength and love which makes my life fuller and more rewarding
than it would otherwise be.

To my friends at Michigan State I send my heartfelt thanks. In
particular, to Bill and Margaret Parsons, Kim Shopmever, Ginger Macheski,
Marvin Finke, Alan Radke and Peter Grimes. They made those long drives
to East Lansing worthwhile and made me feel at home when I was with them.

My thanks go to the women and men who work at the Centre, for putting
aside their fears and reservations and allowing us to peer into their very
private worlds. Their candid responses make this project extremely
important and valuable.

I am very grateful to my typist Jean Anazia whose effort often went
above and beyond the call of duty. Her patience and understanding during
what seemed an endless number of revisions was crucial and much appreciated.

And finally, to my wife Mary Anne. I may have said it before but it
is even more true this time around; her patience and understanding, her
diligence and determination have helped to make this dissertation a reality.
She took care of all the things that needed to be done that I didn't have
the time to do. She understood when I had to spend yet another weekend
working and couldn't be at home. Throughout this entire process, she
managed to remain cheerful and supportive and to keep me headed in the right
direction. For these and many other reasons, this project is dedicated to

her and through her, to our children.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
CHAPTER ONE. Introduction and Statement of The Problem ....... 1
Summary ......................................... 30

CHAPTER TWO. Theoretical Framework and Review of the Literature 35

I. Alienation .......................................... 35

11. Applying the Concept ................................ 43
III. Alienation and Control: Taylor and Scientific

Management .......................................... 56

IV. Alienation and Control: Human Relations Movement ... 63

V. Alienation and Control: Recent Developments ........ 77

VI. Alienation and the Quality of Working Life .......... 85

VII. Workers' Response to Work ........................... 102

VIII. Summary ............................................. 124

CHAPTER THREE. Methodology ................................... 127

I. The Research Site ................................... 127

II. Sample Selection and Data Collection ................ 136

III. A Description of the Residential Counsellors ........ 142

IV. Describing the Major Variables ...................... 147

(i) Alienation and the Quality of Working Life ... 147

(ii) Morale ....................................... 152

(iii) Job Involvement and Intrinsic Motivation ..... 156

(iv) Organizational Variables ..................... 161

(v) Worker Behaviour Patterns .................... 170

CHAPTER FOUR. Data Analysis ................................... 176

(i) Alienation, QWL and Need Satisfaction ........ 176

(ii Morale ....................................... 181

(iii) Job Involvement and Intrinsic Motivation ..... 192

(iv) Organizational Factors ....................... 206

(v) The Residential Units ........................ 212

(vi) The Relationship Between Major Variables ..... 228

CHAPTER FIVE. Discussion and Conclusion ............... . ...... 236

APPENDIX A: Interview Schedule ............................... 254

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE
1A. Frequency Distribution for Age, Sex, Marital Status
and Number of Dependents ................................
1B. Frequency Distribution For Employment History Items .....
1C. Frequency Distribution of Parent's Occupation and
Education ...............................................
10. Frequency Distribution for Religion Items ...............

2. Frequency Distribution for Basic Need Satisfaction
Items ...... .............................................

3. Frequency Distribution for Social Need Satisfaction
Items ...................................................

4. Frequency Distribution for Higher Order Need

Satisfaction Items ....... ..... ..........................
5. Frequency Distribution for Worker Morale Items ..........
6. Frequency Distribution for Job Satisfaction Items .......
7. Frequency Distribution for Job Involvement Items ........
8. Frequency Distribution for Maturation Items .............
9. Frequency Distribution for Authoritarianism Items .......
10. Frequency Distribution for Autonomy Items ...............

11. Frequency Distribution for Democratic Supervision Items .
12. Frequency Distribution of Confrontation Items ...........
13. Frequency Distribution of Cooperation Items .............

14. Cooperation by Basic, Social and Higher Order Need
Satisfaction .................... .. ....... . ..............

15. Confrontation by Basic, Social and Higher Order Need

Satisfaction ........ ...... .... ....... .. ....... . .........
16. Frequency Distribution for Items Affecting Morale .......
17. Morale by Basic, Social and Higher Order Need

Satisfaction ....... ..... ....... ........ .. ...............
18. Morale by Organizational Factors ........................

vi

Page

143
143

144
144

149

151

152
155
155
157
159
162
163
164
172
174

177

178
182

187
188

TABLE

19.
20.

21.

22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

Morale by Worker Behaviour Measures .....................

Job Involvement by Basic, Social and Higher Order Need

Satisfaction ............................................

Intrinsic Motivation by Basic, Social and High Order
Need Satisfaction ......................................

Job Involvement by Organizational Factors ..............
Intrinsic Motivation by Organizational Factors .........
Job Involvement by Worker Behaviour Measures ...........
Intrinsic Motivation by Worker Behaviour Measures ......
Organizational Factors by Basic Need Satisfaction ......
Organizational Factors by Social Need Satisfaction .....
Organizational Factors by Higher Order Need Satisfaction
Organizational Factors by Cooperation ..................
Organizational Factors by Confrontation ................

Frequency Distribution of Authoritarianism in the Four
Residential Units ......................................

Frequency Distribution of Autonomy in the Four
Residential Units .. ....................................

Frequency Distribution of Democratic Supervision in
the Four Residential Units .............................

Frequency Distribution of Basic Need Satisfaction in the
Four Residential Units .................................

Frequency Distribution of Social Need Satisfaction in
the Four Residential Units ........... . ..... ....... .....

Frequency Distribution of Higher Order Need Satisfaction
in the Four Residential Units ........ ............... ...

Frequency Distribution for Job Involvement in the Four
Residential Units ......................................

Frequency Distribution for Intrinsic Motivation in the
Four Residential Units .................................

vii

Page

191

193

193
197
197
201
201
207
207
207
210
210

213

213

213

216

216

216

219

219

TABLE Page

39. Frequency Distribution for Morale in the Four
Residential Units ...................................... 219

40. Frequency Distribution For Cooperation in the Four
Residential Units ...................................... 221

41. Frequency Distribution for Confrontation in the Four
Residential Units ...................................... 221

42. Frequency Distribution for Age and Sex in the Four
Residential Units ...................................... 223

43. Frequency Distribution of Length of Employment at the
Centre for the Staff in the Four Residential Units ..... 224

44. Frequency Distribution for "Difficulty in Getting a
Promotion," Item for the Residential Staff in the Four
Residential Units ...................................... 225

45. Frequency Distribution for “How Important is a Promotion
to you," Item for the Staff in the Four Residential
Units .................................................. 226

46. Frequency Distribution for How Closely Are Rules
Followed, Item for the Staff in the Four Residential
Units .................................................. 227

47. Multiple Regression of Worker Behaviour and Morale
Measures on Job Related Variables ...................... 228

48. Multiple Regression of Need Satisfaction Measures
in Job Related Variables ............................... 233

LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Figure I. Factor Matrix Including Need Satisfaction and
Job Orientation Items .......................... 151
Figure II. Factor Matrix Including Organizational Factors . 167
Figure III. Factors Matrix Including Behavioural Variables . 171

viii

Introduction and Statement of the Problem.

 

The workplace is like a bell curve. At one end are a few workers who
will do anything for you, who will work hard no matter what. They'll
give the company their all, sometimes more than it deserves. Then
there are the majority of the workers in the middle. They'll do what
is really necessary but no more. Finally at the other end are the bad
ones. They're the guys who will look for any excuse to get out of
work and try to find some way to goof off. The problem for your front
line supervisors is to keep them from influencing the rest. If they
get to the ones in the middle and begin to pull them down, you're in
bad trouble."

The manner in which work is organized in our society has undergone a
number of significant changes since Taylor first made these observations
about workers more than sixty years ago. While technological innovations
and changes in management practice have completely reshaped the workplace,
the way that people behave at work has remained remarkably unchanged and
workers act today much as they did when Taylor was making his observations.

The purpose of this research is to examine some of the factors which
affect the decisions that people make about their behaviour at work. What
influences some workers to "give the company their all," for example, while
others working right along side them "look for any excuse to get out of
work"? What role does the organization of the workplace itself play in the
apparent alienation and discontent being expressed by many workers today?
By addressing these and other related issues, it is hoped that some insight
will be gained into the various types of strategies adopted by workers as
well as some understanding of the wide variation which exists in their
verbal and behavioural responses to work.

This study focuses specifically on the direct care staff of a large

institution for the developmentally handicapped. These workers, known as

Residential Counsellors, are primarily responsible for the delivery of

personal and health care services to the clients/residents of the institu-
tion (The Centre). This particular group of workers was selected for study
since their work roles and personal characteristics reflect those of a
large and growing segment of the labour force in the service sector of the
economy. Their situation is similar to that of people working in a number
of lower level white collar occupations. The focus on this group of
workers allows a comparison to be made between their responses and those of
workers in both more traditional professional/technical industrial jobs as
well as to those in related occupations.

Some specific similarities exist between these workers and others in
this segment of the labour market on such variables as basic demographic
characteristics, the educational requirements for their jobs, their po-
sitions in the institution's hierarchy, the specific nature of their work
tasks, and the amount of autonomy they exercise at work. These are dis-
cussed in greater detail below.

A majority of the Residential Counsellors are young, well educated
women, who have had little previous work experience. This is typical among
many of the workers in this occupational category. Most of these jobs
require specialized training or post secondary education. In the case of
the Residential Counsellors (RC's), this consists of the completion of a
two year community college programme as well as government certification in
the field. These requirements represent a recent upgrading in the entrance
level qualifications required for this position. In the past, people were
hired with minimum formal qualifications and were given on the job training
once hired. This is indicative of a trend which has been occurring in

recent years in many of these occupations including laboratory

technologists, child care workers and respiratory and X-ray technologists
among others.

The Residential Counsellors occupy a lower status position in the
institution's "white collar" hierarchy. While they are accorded higher
status than the maintenance workers, house keeping and dietary staff and
the clerical staff, they are essentially at the bottom of the institutions
client services and health care delivery system. As such, they make few
"treatment" decisions of their own, usually following the orders of the
doctors and psychologists working at the Centre. Their role is essentially
that of a technician, who implements the decisions of higher status profes-
sionals by following an already established set of procedures. This is
another common feature of jobs at this level and in this segment of the
labour market.

Many of the new white collar workers are employed by the government
and work in institutions such as schools or hospitals which deliver ser-
vices directly to their clients. This has resulted in a number of specific
problems for these workers, especially in the current period of prolonged
economic recession. While they may not experience the same types of
pressures which exists in the private, "production for profit" sector, the
severe financial restrictions faced by government funded agencies has
resulted in such problems as the chronic underfunding of programmes;
greatly reduced staffing levels; the deferment of capital expenditures;
cutbacks in materials and supplies; and a whole array of other costs
cutting measures. This has placed a tremendous strain on already overbur-
den services and has proven particularly difficult on the people who

provide these services. The irony of the situation is that the demand for

these services is highest at precisely those times when the economy is weak
and additional resources for these types of programmes are unavailable.

A final reason for selecting these particular workers for study, is
based on the information garnered through several lengthy discussions with
a number of well placed informants working at the Centre. It was dis-
covered during the course of these conversations, that the recently ap-
pointed Administrator of the facility had instituted a series of program-
mes, which were aimed at improving the relations which exist between the RC
staff and the Centre's administration. This included such things as an
open door policy whereby the RC's could have direct access to the Adminis-
trator to discuss work related matters; regularly scheduled staff meetings;
improved communications between the central administration and the RC's;
the transmission of information to the RC staff concerning policy 0r
programme changes which were being contemplated, etc.

The existence of this type of climate at the Centre was deemed impor-
tant for the present study since it incorporates some of the key ideas
which underlie the "quality of working life" movement. As such, the
situation at the Centre provided an ideal opportunity to examine the impact
that some of these ideas have on workers, especially in terms of their
verbal and behavioural responses to work.

Recently, the "quality of working life" movement has been receiving
renewed attention as a salient means of addressing the problems of aliena-
tion from work. Leaders from government, business and labour have given
their support to OWL initiatives in this regard, with companies such as
General Motors and Ford, in conjunction with the United Automobile Workers,
leading the way. A number of major QWL programmes have been introduced by

these organizations during the last several years. The initial indication

is that there is a potential for QWL based programmes to expand in the
future and that this orientation may set the pattern for the emerging
structure of industrial relations in this country.

The current research site does not have a formal QWL programme in
operation however, as was noted above, the initiatives taken by the Admin-
istrator, reflect the philosophical assumptions which underlie the OWL
movement. Conducting research of this type in an organization which has an
ongoing QWL project would have been extremely difficult if not impossible
since the staff in this situation is sensitized beforehand to the types of
results they should expect from participation in the programme. This is
precisely the type of information which the current research sought to
gather. As it was, the RC staff expressed a wide range of opinions on the
viability and usefulness of many of the conditions which affected their
jobs at the Centre, including those related to the Administrator's actions.

The existence of and response to worker alienation provide the major
focus for the current research. In fact, most of the factors described
above in relation to the particular group of workers being studied here,
addresses the problem of alienation in one way or another. For example,
the development of the "quality of working life" movement can be seen as a
direct response to this problem. Similarly, the growth of the white collar
sector of the labour market was seen by some as the end of heavy, dirty,
alienating work.

On the other hand, the principle cause of the problem of alienation
for some, was the arrival onto the labour market, of a generation of new,
highly educated workers, who were demanding much more from their jobs than
their parents had. Their attitudes and behaviour lead some critics to

suggest that the work ethic in America was dead.

These events occurred during a particularly turbulent period in
American history. The issues and concerns voiced during this time continue
to influence the manner in which we currently address the same problems.

We begin, therefore, with a brief discussion of the historical circum-
stances which gave rise to both the growing awareness of the problem of
alienation and to the development of the "quality of working life" movement
as a response to this problem. This will provide the necessary background
for understanding the development of each of these concepts as well as a
basis from which to assess the viability of this approach in the present
context. It is to this discussion that we now turn.

In January of 1973, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
of the United States Government, published a provocative and often contro-

versial report entitled Work In America.2 This report presented a compre-

 

hensive and critical assessment of the problems associated with the insti-
tution of work at that time. Both the substance and timing of the document
were particularly significant given the political, social and economic
climate of the period. The report called for fundamental changes in the
way that work was organized and performed. It seemed to capture and
crystallize the uneasy mood of the period by giving a specific focus to the
concerns expressed. In fact, there was a widespread recognition of the
increasing problems of worker alienation and dissatisfaction as well as
mounting demands that something be done.

The tumultuous decade of the sixties was finding its expression in the
labour force as hostility and disillusionment was on the rise among the
nation's workers. It was becoming increasingly clear, to a growing number

of observers, that some form of ameliorative action was required and the

Work In America report provided the parameters within which much of the
subsequent discussion took place.
The seriousness of the situation had not escaped the view of the
politicians of the day. In 1971, Senator Edward Kennedy, for example,
introduced a bill entitled "The Worker Alienation Act", which called for an
extensive study of the problem of alienation and the development of tech-
niques to prevent its spread.3 While this bill was eventually withdrawn,
it provided the impetus needed to prompt the then Secretary of H.E.W.,
Elliot Richardson, to commission a special task force to study the matter.
The ensuing investigation culminated in the publication of the Work In
America report.
The political currency of the situation developing in the country's
offices and factories continued to grow and in August of 1973, the United
States Senate did pass a bill,
"the aim of which was to provide for research solutions to the
problem of alienation among workers in all occupations and
industries and technical assistance to those companies and
unions, state and local governments seeking to find ways to deal
with the problem...“

The Bill went on to recommend,
"the humanization of working conditions and work so as to in-
crease worker satisfaction and diminish the negative effects of
worker dissatisfaction; in so far as possible, york should be
designed to maximize potentials for democracy."

The concern expressed by the politicians was echoed by both union
leaders and corporate executives. This was particularly evident in the
contract negotiations which got underway in 1973 between the United Automo-
bile Workers and the "big three" automakers. In these negotiations, the
UAW demanded that a joint labour-management committee be established to

deal with matters concerning the "Quality of Work Life" and that this

request be included in the new contract.5 During that same year, a letter

of agreement was, in fact, incorporated into the national General Motors-
UAW master contract which called for the establishment of just such a
committee! Its specific mandate was to encourage collaborative efforts by
the union and the company, to solve problems related to work.6
As Stokes has noted, it had become readily apparent that "the tradi-
tional tools of economic management [had become] impotent in the face of

7 What was needed was a new

worker alienation and growing economic stress."
approach to deal with the problems of work. The traditional adversarial
system of industrial relations which was in operation, contained many
destructive elements and was clearly unable to deal with the current
problems. He stated that,
“[it was] jerry-built to deal with work force instability, manual
jobs fragmented into simple tasks, foremen with awesome disci-
plinary powers, and a deeply rooted sense thag a wide gap existed
between those who work and those who manage."

This type of system was out of step with the existing situation. It
had little to offer in the way of solutions and in fact served to exacer-
bate the situation in many ways.

The Work In America report noted that many industrial engineers had
equated increased productivity almost exclusively with advances in tech-
nology.9 The human dimension of the production process was completely
ignored in their formulations. This was precisely the kind of thinking
behind the construction of the General Motors automobile assembly plant in
Lordstown, Ohio. The now famous events which took place at that plant
serve as a testimony to the shortcomings of the "technology equals produc-
tivity" argument. The plant was rumoured to be the most modern and effi-
cient in existence. Indeed, it was heralded as "the very model of automa-

"10

tion at that time. A great deal of attention had been paid to the

impressive new technology which was introduced at the facility however

little attention was given to the people who worked there. Hostilities at
the plant erupted over the pace of the assembly line and the robot-like
tasks that the workers were asked to perform and a series of bitter strikes

11 The authors of Work In America pointed out

erupted there early in 1972.
that a serious miscalculation had been made. They state that,
"as the costs of absenteeism, wildcat strikes, turnover and
industrial sabotage become an increasingly significant part of
the cost of doing business, it is becoming clear that the current
concept of industrial efficiency conveniently but mistakenly
ignores the social half of the equation."

It is significant that this was nowhere more evident than at the
technically superior Lordstown plant!

The growing resistance referred to above indicated that workers were
becoming much less willing to accept fragmented, dehumanizing jobs; were
less committed to "keeping their noses to the grindstone"; and were less
willing to submit to harsh and often arbitrary forms of discipline. This
was becoming increasingly apparent in both their attitudes and behaviour
and was particularly pronounced among workers who were under thirty-five.
As Mills notes,

"The turnoff of the 1970's wasn't just attitude, it was being
tabulated across the country in the rising error and rejection
rates, in absenteeism and turnover rates, in increasing shoddi-
ness and deteriorating quality of products and services and above
all it was being tabulated in the alarming fall of productivity
gains to all time lows, despite growing management - and some
union - attempts to stem it."

Stokes reports that, between 1968 and 1978, full time factory employ-

14 The United

ees in the United States had an absentee rate of 4.2 percent.
States Labor Department estimated that this figure could have been cut in
half! Moreover, the high absenteeism continued during this period despite
high levels of unemployment. Stokes goes on to describe some of the

deleterious effects that this has on production,

 

1‘"
I)

in

u

‘\n

:1:
"‘5

z I; ‘A
u

10

"the low quality of workmanship on assembly lines...is reflected
in the standard American joke that one should not buy a car built
on a Mondgy or a Friday when workers are particularly preoc-
cupied."

Although the problem of alienation described by many of the writers of
the period was not new, it had become increasingly visible as the 1960's
came to an end and the 1970's began. This may have been due at least in
part, to the effects of several events which were taking place during the
early 1970's on the international scene. These events served to exacerbate
the the nation's problems since the events taking place on the internation-
al front contributed directly to the deteriorating domestic economy.

For example, the "alarming" fall in the productivity gains described
above came at a time when American industry was beginning to experience
mounting competition from goods manufactured abroad. Notably, Japanese and
German industries were enjoying unprecedented growth rates brought about
largely by their unusually high productivity rates. Their modern plants
and more efficient work organizations meant that they were able to sell
their products at very competitive prices in the American market. For the
first time the monopoly position enjoyed by many American firms was being
threatened.

Another factor which had a considerable impact at the time was the oil
embargo and energy crisis of the early 1970's. This severely disrupted the
domestic American economy and actually sent the nation plummeting headlong
into a severe recession. The skyrocketing energy costs reverberated
throughout the economy as prices for most goods rose to offset the increas-
ed energy costs. Inflation was climbing, as was unemployment, and the
nation settled into a condition known as Stagflation.

It is not difficult to see why there was so much concern over worker

alienation at this time, since it was linked directly to worker

11

productivity. It was imperative that some sort of solution to the problem
be found in order to boost productivity to previous levels.

Each of the developments outlined above contributed in one way or
another to the widespread concern that was expressed by business, union and
government leaders, over the problems surrounding work. For many, the
target was clearly the falling productivity levels. For others, however,
the situation afforded an opportunity to critically examine some of the
"structural" problems related to work in a more general sense. Quite often
these two concerns were merged in the subsequent effort to discover the
causes of worker alienation and especially in the search for a solution.
While numerous factors were labelled as possible sources of the problem,
several recurring themes began to emerge in the literature. The Work In
America report outlines a number of the more important of these. These are
discussed below.

Perhaps the most commonly cited cause for the problems of alienation
was the entrance into the labour market of an increasing number of new,
young, well educated workers. These workers were bringing new characteris-
tics, new attitudes and new expectations with them, about what work should
be like. On the opposite side, the structure of work had changed very
little over time and could not meet these emerging expectations. The
result of this mismatch was evident in the ensuing response made by these
people to work.16

Several factors were identified as having a major impact on the
situation. These included the increased educational attainment of the
American population in general and of the new entrants into the labour
market in particular. In addition, the relative prosperity experienced by

the post war generation meant that many of these new workers had never

12

experienced economic hardships. Images of the depression existed only in
novels and movies for these workers. These factors combined to create a
generation of workers who were interested in more than simply earning a
living and they were demanding a great deal more from their work.17 Their
schooling had taught them to aspire to high ideals such as democracy and
freedom and few were prepared for the rigidly controlled, hierarchical and
bureaucratic work organizations they encountered. Simply stated, they
wanted more than was being offered. They wanted jobs that were challeng-
ing, satisfying and interesting.
"Simplified tasks for those who are not simple minded; close
supervision by those whose legitimacy rests only on a hierarchi-
cal structure and jobs that have nothing but money to offer in an
affluent age are simply rejected. For many of the new workers,
the monotony of work, the scale of organization and their inabil-
ity to control the pace and style of work are cause for gesent-
ment which they, unlike older workers, do not repress."

Thus, the primary concern of these young workers centered on the
nature of their jobs rather than on wages or security issues. This fact
was reflected in a number of studies which focussed on the changing atti-
tudes of workers. Herrick and Quinn, for example, examined the effects of
various job factors thought to be related to job satisfaction and found
that only one of the top ten of these factors, was associated with economic

19

variables such as pay or job security. The other nine were found to

revolve around issues related to job control.

Similarly, in an extensive study conducted by the University of
Michigan, workers were asked to rate twenty five aspects of work in the
order of their importance. Here again, it was found that "good pay“ was
not at the top of the list but ranked fifth behind interesting work; enough
help and equipment to get the job done; enough information to get the job

done and enough authority to get the job done.20

13

The changing attitudes and expectations among the nation's workers was
variously described as the demise of the work ethic in America or more
sardonically as a reflection of the particularly singular mood of the

times.21

In any case, it was clear that the situation in the workplace was
changing rapidly and as the Lordstown experience had shown, the social
aspects of production could no longer be ignored. In a sense, the identi-
fication of the young workers and their expectations as the source of the
unrest in the workplace provided a modicum of h0pe since it meant that the
problems of work were not unresolvable. As the authors of Work In America
note, "working conditions are far easier to change than demographic fac-

tors!"22

Thus while work could be redesigned to accommodate the changing
demands of the workforce, problems based on such factors as age, sex, race
or class are more difficult to handle!

A second problem discussed in Work In America centers on the decreas-

23 The

ing number of people in the United States who are self-employed.
report indicated that fewer and fewer Americans would have the opportunity
to be self-employed as time went on. What this signifies is that a growing
number of people will not have the option of working for themselves, and in
a very real sense, will lose the ability to control their own lives.
Instead, a growing proportion of the labour force will find themselves
working in large scale, authoritarian organizations, where they will have
little opportunity to have any say in the decisions that affect their work
lives.

For many years, the possibility of working for oneself allowed a
significant number of American workers to apply their talents and expend

their energies as they saw fit. Much of the folklore of the nation, in

fact, rests on the image of the rugged frontiersman making his way alone

14

across uncharted territory. The thought of having to work for someone
else, let alone alongside several thousand others, in a dirty, noisy, grimy
factory, is wholly unpalatable in this context. The mythology reflected
the idea that if a people worked hard, applied themselves, and their
skills, talents and ingenuity properly, great success was not only possible
but likely. Few can reach these algeristic heights however, while working
on an assembly line! Most in fact stop dreaming of them!

A third and perhaps most important factor outlined in Work In America,
describes the anachronistic nature of the existing industrial relations
system. This was largely based on the system of "Scientific Management"
developed by Fredrick W. Taylor at the turn of the century.

It was Taylor,
"the father of time and motion studies, who broke down each task
into its component parts and then designed the single most
efficient way to do the whole job. Concern for the worker got
lost in the shuffle. "In the past, the man has been first,"
wrote Taylor. "In the future, the system must be first."
Taylor's fanatical devotion to the rationalization of production
led him to glorify the dehumanizing nature of his theories. "All
possible brain work should be removed from the shop... the time
during which the mag4stops to think is part of the time that he
is not productive."

This type of work organization is most often identified with the
assembly line which has been widely cited as a major source of worker

25

alienation. "The psychological damage wrought by having one's human

ingenuity and creativeness compacted into a nineteen second cycle" becomes

readily apparent especially when the task has to be repeated 1500 times a

26 Reich describes work under this system as mindless, exhausting

27

day!
boring, servile, hateful and something to be endured. The authors of
thrk In America suggest that a concept of efficiency based upon such a
modefl ignores the costs of this system in terms of the harm it does to

people as well as the production which is lost due to the hostility it

15

engenders. They conclude that the costs of this system far outweigh its
benefits.28
A number of pronounced similarities exist between many of the factors
discussed above with respect to their contributions to the existence of
worker alienation. The most common and recurring theme among them is that
of the control exercised over the labour process. For instance, many of
the new members of the labour force found the lack of control they had in
their jobs distasteful. The diminishing opportunities for self-employment
also refers specifically to the fact that fewer and fewer workers will be
able to be their own boss and thus control their own work lives. The
anachronistic nature of Taylorism rests largely on the conscious and
deliberate attempt of this system, to remove all control from the person
doing the work and relocating it in the company's planning department.
Control over one's work is seen therefore as a major factor in the
existence of worker alienation and thus as a vital feature in any attempt
to solve the problem. This notion is incorporated throughout the Work In
America report and is emphasized in particular in the prescriptions offered
by the authors for change. They call for work to be redesigned in such a
fashion as to provide workers with an opportunity to participate in the

decisions that affect their lives.29

The Quality of Working Life movement
reflects many of these same concerns. Proponents of this approach argue
that work should be designed so as to take into account the needs and
abilities of the people who do the work and that these workers should have
control over their work lives.30
These types of ideas began to emerge slowly during the early 1970's.
Concern over the experiences of people at work began to grow in several

quarters at that time, and while similar ideas were being expressed, it was

16

difficult, as Mills notes, to give the movement a name. It was described
as "the quiet revolution"; "the quality of work phenomenon"; "the quality
of work life"; "human productivity"; "the changing world of work" etc. etc.
He chooses the term Human Resource Development to refer to these con-
cerns.31 In the 1980's, this area has increasingly become subsumed under
the rubric of the "Quality of Working Life." (QWL).

Over the past decade, the QWL movement has undergone a number of
significant changes. Initially, the impetus for work redesign and re-
organization was spearheaded by proponents of the QWL approach as well as
by the ideas of the researchers at the Tavistock Institute who were begin-

32

ning to focus on the "socio-technical" nature of the workplace. The

33 Interest

initial response to these types of ideas was quite favourable.
in "hot" new concepts such as job enrichment and worker participation
spread rapidly and became quite fashionable among managers and with the
public in general. However, as the results of many of the early and
amateurish experiences proved unimpressive, the idea began to lose its
currency and by the middle of the decade the movement began to fade.

People were becoming more and more preoccupied with the worsening economic
climate. This continued, for the most part, through to the end of the
decade.

The 1980's have witnessed a steady resurgence of interest in the
"Quality of Working Life" concept. Buttressed by a growing number of
specialists in the field and the knowledge gained from past experiences,
many organizations began showing an interest in establishing QWL programmes
of their own. Support from the union movement also increased during this

time and today they are active participants in, and in many instances,

initiators of OWL projects. Government has also become quite active in

17

this area and a number of OWL centers have been established throughout the
country with government support.34

One of the principle tasks of the present research is to examine the
viability of some of the basic ideas upon which the QWL concept is built.
Essential among these is the notion that worker participation in the
decisions that affect his/her work life is the key to reducing worker
alienation. While this is a central tenet of the QWL approach, it also
forms the basis of the theoretical framework for the current research.

This framework which is based on the concept of alienation developed by
Karl Marx, will be described in greater detail below. It is important at
this point however, to examine the similarities which exist between the
philosophical underpinnings of the QWL approach and Marx's concept of
alienation.

To begin with, both constructs define work as a central feature of
human society. Work is seen to extend far beyond the factory gates and
office walls and to reverberate throughout society. In the QWL model, work
is looked at as an anchoring institution for the individual and what
happens at work impacts directly on the rest of the person's life. For
Marx, work, as human activity, provides both the means for staying alive in
the physical sense as well as the means for expressing the uniquely human
attributes which identify us as distinctly human beings. Work, in this
sense, gives meaning to life and links individuals together with other
members of the human "species".35

The major response to work alienation during the last decade has, in
one way or another, reflected both the ideas about alienation and the

importance of work. Thus work humanization, job enrichment, job enlarge-

ment and work redesign are based, to varying degrees, on the idea that

18

human work should be more than simply a means for making a living. The
closer these programmes come to the Marxian position for solving aliena-
tion, the greater the amount of control placed in the hands of the worker.
While job enlargement, for example, offers workers very little in the way
of increased control over their work, QWL projects may range from being
simple problem solving encounters, to "quality circles", to situations in
which worker's control is the explicit goal of the project.

The amount of worker control extant in any particular work orga-
nization is indicative of the extent to which the organization in question
reflects Tayloristic management principles or more democratic forms of work
organization. The implication here is that the more "democratic" an
organization, the less alienating it will be. It should be clear, however,
that this does not mean that any existing organization can move beyond the
parameters which define it as being part of a capitalist economic system.
On the other hand, it would be unwise to ignore the fundamental differences
which exist between organizations since some are clearly more democratic
than others. In addition, the experience of increased participation and
democratic decision making itself may have enormous implications for both
the workers involved and for society in general. As was noted above, the
increased educational level of young workers had a marked impact on the
aspirations, expectations and behaviour of these workers. The potential
impact of a generation of workers who have been even marginally exposed to
democracy in the workplace is unclear. The consciousness which arises in
this context, however, will be much different from that of workers who have
no experience with democracy at all!

A second remedy to the problem of alienation which was advanced during

this period was the hope that many placed in the increasing number of white

19

collar jobs that were supposed to be created. The labour market had been
experiencing a shift away from the traditional industrial jobs, to jobs in
the tertiary sector of the economy. The heavy, dirty, assembly line jobs
in the old line industries were thought to be the inherent cause of much of
the discontent. The new jobs, on the other hand, would be cleaner, more
desirable, higher status, more challenging, etc. etc., and in this way
would eliminate the source of the problem.

d."36 It was

This represented the promise of the "white collar worl
based on the expansion of the service sector, especially in the knowledge
processing and information industries. The lure of the computer age proved
quite seductive, and many heralded its arrival. Unfortunately, the spank-
ing new technology did little to alter the underlying production relations
in the economy, and those who managed to find work in these new "high tech"
industries, discovered that very little had changed. For the vast majority
of people, the promise of the "white collar" society failed to materialize.
Very few of those who were absorbed into the service sector found the
challenge, status and desirability that had been forecast for these jobs.37

Several aspects of this development warrant further consideration. To
begin with, the changes that have taken place in modern industry have
resulted in a dramatic reduction in the proportion of people employed in
the production sector of the labour market. This has been coupled with an
increase in the number of people working in the distribution and service
sector of the economy. Silverman and Yanowitch suggest that,

"under this heading one could list government workers of all
kinds including teachers, those employed in many branches of the
sales apparatus, including most of the personnel in the mass
communications media, workers and salaried personnel in finance,
insurance, and real estate; and the providers of many different

kinds of personal services from beauty treatments to sports
spectacles. In the United States today these job categories,

20

taken together, probably account for close t38three quarters of
the employed non-agricultural labour force."

Mills echoes this appraisal in noting that, "by the late 1970's,
already almost two jobs out of three had become people jobs providing
services or information handling or both."39

Rinehart provides a lengthy analysis of the various implications
contained in the promise of what he refers to as the "White Collar
World".40 In particular, he examines the prospects for the decrease of
worker alienation through the introduction of a large number of white
collar jobs into the labour market. He discusses this question with
reference to both the quantitative and qualitative changes that have taken
place in the labour market as a result of the dramatic increases described
above in the service sector of the economy.

Rinehart begins by noting a number of shortcomings in the proposal
that alienation would be reduced through white collar jobs. He suggests,
for example, that there has in fact been a significant shift in the labour
market towards the service sector, and that this has resulted in an in-
crease in the number of white collar jobs available, but this has not come
about through a reduction in the number of blue collar jobs. This has
occurred, according to Rinehart, largely at the expense of the agricultural
sector while the actual number of blue collar jobs in the economy has
remained relatively constant over the last several decades. In this
respect, the prospects of reducing the alienation experienced by signifi-
cant numbers of blue collar workers through the creation of white collar
jobs does not appear probable.

Additionally, and perhaps more importantly for the present purposes,
most of the new white collar jobs which have been created in the service

sector have been located at the bottom of this category. Most of the

21

people working in these occupations are engaged chiefly, in lower level
clerical, sales and service jobs such as the one being examined in the
present research. These jobs however, have proven in most cases to be
neither challenging, complex, nor very rewarding. Workers in these occu-
pations do not exercise the kinds of control and autonomy typically associ-
ated with white collar employment.

This situation has prevailed in many of the supposed high technology
jobs, as well. This includes the knowledge jobs where a large percentage
of them are classified as professional or technical. In many of these
jobs, people are employed as sub-professionals, semi-professionals, or
technicians. This, implies that these people do little in the way of
creative thinking, exercise virtually no control over their work and are
usually "professional" in name only. Most are involved in carrying out
routine tasks which involve already established procedures. Rinehart
estimates that roughly seventy percent of the people in these types of
occupations can be described in this manner. Consistent with this ap-
praisal, the authors of Work In America point out that,

"...it is illusory to believe that technology is opening new high
level jobs that are replacing low-level jobs. Most new jobs
offer little in the way of "career" mobility 4113b technicians do
not advance along a path and become doctors."

Residential Counsellors do not advance along a path and become Psy-
chologists, Social Workers or Doctors either!

Several important ramification of this analysis need to be considered
in light of the present research. First, many of these new white collar
jobs are experiencing an artificial inflation in the credentials needed for
entrance into the occupations, whether the jobs themselves require it or
not. This upgrading of qualifications reflects the increasing level of

education in the general population so that jobs which were once filled by

22

people with high school diploma are now being filled with college gradu-

ates. This is somewhat problematic and may contribute to worker discontent

since,
"...the demand for higher academic credentials has not increased
the prestige, status, pay, or difficulty of the job... It is not
surprising then, that the Survey of Working Conditions found much
of the greatest work dissatisfaction in the country among young,
well-educated workers who were in low-paying, dull, routine and
fractioned clerical positions."

A consequence of this situation is reflected in the increasing hostil-
ity and militancy expressed by many of these new white collar workers. At
one time, for example, people working as teachers, nurses and police
officers considered themselves to be professionals and they belonged to
various professional associations. For many of these workers today, the
title of “association“ remains in name only as more and more of them not
only identify with but also employ the methods once used almost exclusively
by the members of the traditional working class. This is especially
evident in the use of strike tactics by such groups as teachers, fire-

43 For these "profes-

fighters, police officers, nurses and even doctors!
sionals" the performance of one's duty had been approached as a form of
social trust, to be carried out with the utmost responsibility. In the
past, going out on strike represented a serious breach of this trust and
was therefore unthinkable. The changes in the labour market described
above, have obviously had a major impact on the way that these workers
perceive themselves and their roles in society. It is obvious from their

actions that neither of these appears to be moving in a positive direction!

Harry Braverman, in his seminal work "Labour and Monopoly Capital,

 

presents a thorough analysis of the changes that have taken place in

clerical and service sector occupations since the turn of the century.44

The central thesis of this work is that many of the skills and

23

responsibilities traditionally found in these occupations have been eroded
in a process which he labels "de-skilling“. This, he says, has been the
result of the increasing rationalization, fragmentation and mechanization
of these jobs in much the manner that this occurred in the industrial
sector earlier this century. He goes on to describe this as a deliberate
and conscious process which is aimed at increasing the organization's
(i.e., the management's) control over these employees. He refers to this
process as "the degradation of work in the twentieth century," and traces
much of it back to the philosophy underlying Taylor's system of "Scientific
Management."

The promise of the white collar solution to the problem of worker
alienation remains largely unfulfilled. The common thread in much of the
analysis presented above revolves around the idea of worker's control. The
very essence of the promise held by white collar work was based precisely
on the ability of this type of employment to provide people with jobs in
which they could exercise their decision making powers and have some
control over their work. White collar jobs were to be high status, challeng-
ing and rewarding and the factor which made them this way was the control
that people in these occupations traditionally enjoyed. Unfortunately,
precious few of the new white collar jobs were actually able to fulfill the
promises. In many of these jobs, "the tyranny of the machine" was replaced
by the "tyranny of the bureaucracy."

"Alienation and work despair are not limited to the assembly line
... A similar pattern is faced by a growing number of white
collar workers in industrial societies. As the service sector of
an economy grows, fewer and fewer people are involved in the
actual production of goods. Filing papers in an office or taking
orders in a fast food restaurant, the kind of job that many
people do today, is often soulless work. In fact, while many
blue collar workers are experimenting with doing a variety of

creative tasks, the white collaESworker seems to be moving toward
a narrower range of functions."

24

The work situation being experienced by the Residential Counsellors
studied in the present research reflects the occupational conditions which
characterize the clerical workers described by Braverman in many respects.
However, differences between these two groups of workers, do exist on a
number of very significant dimensions. These have to do primarily with the
manner in which each of these groups of workers experience control at work.

For many clerical and kindred workers, the process of control has
developed through the rationalization and fragmentation of their jobs,
coupled with the simultaneous development of new office technology which
enhances this process. Studies of this practice in the computer industry,
for example, depict the transformation of the general specialist in comput-
ers into a number of fractioned positions, such as systems analyst, program-
mer, key punch operator, and repair technician. Kraft for example notes
that at one time all of these jobs were performed by a single individual in

a craft-like manner.46

He goes on to suggest that the lack of managerial
control over these "professionals" however, eventually resulted in the job
fragmentation which is now so evident in this occupation.

The introduction of word processing technology has had a similar

effect on many secretarial jobs.47

The hardware itself, in this instance,
provides the means as well as the rationale for increasing the division of
labour in this area. People who work with word processors, especially in
large offices, are located in a I'pool" of such workers in most cases and
receive work from all quarters of the organization. While this may not
appear to be a drastic change at first glance, the impact that this has on
the people performing these jobs is enormous. For instance, secretaries

have traditionally occupied positions in organizations which afforded them

some impact on its effective operation. They formed a large part of the

25

organization's informal structure and their knowledge of the job and the
work process enabled them to exercise a certain degree of control and
influence at work. This also provided them with an understanding of the
workings of the entire system and in particular, of the role they played in
it.

As members of a typing pool working with word processors, no knowledge
of the purpose of the work, the work routine, the goals of the organization
etc., etc., is acquired by the workers. Error correction is so easy, in
fact, that no substantive knowledge of what is being typed is required at
all. The result of this change is quite dramatic. The person working on a
word processor receives the work to be done in a detached way, has little
understanding of or identification with either the work itself or the
people that it is related to. While they may go to work in nicer clothes,
work in a cleaner environment, have air conditioning and piped in music,
the type of work that they actually do makes them much closer to people
working on assembly lines than it does to the people who occupy the offices
just a few feet away from them. Based on the way the work is organized,
they could just as easily be attaching front fenders as typing form let-
ters!

The most significant aspect of this situation is the nature of the
control experienced by these workers. As has already been noted, the job
that these people do represents only a small part of the job traditionally
done by secretaries. This has been broken down into a number of fragmented
tasks with a group of workers now responsible for only a small part of what
was once the domain of a single occupation. Additionally, and perhaps more
significantly for the present analysis, the technology which has been

developed for these jobs, permits a level of control over these workers

26

which was previously unattainable.48

By "tying" a worker to a particular
piece of equipment and by incorporating into the design of the equipment a
means for evaluating both the quality and quantity of the work performed,
these workers are now subjected to much higher levels of scrutiny in their
work performance.

People working at key punch machines provide an excellent example of
this type of control. Each of these workers is give a production quota
which can be easily checked since the machine automatically records the
output produced. Moreover, the quality of the work done is also controlla-
ble since it can be traced back to the particular worker assigned to the

various machines.49

Even the assembly line cannot match this minute level
of constant control! On an assembly line it is very difficult to discover
which worker deliberately threw the wrench into the works to sabotage
production!

The Residential Counsellors, unlike their clerical counterparts, are
not subject to this type of control process at work. Instead, they experi-
ence what Perrow has called "unobtrusive controls", which work on the

decision making processes of the employee.50

According to Perrow, this
system operates through the organization's ability to control the "prem-
ises“ upon which the decisions that people make at work are based. It
relies on the internalization of particular attitudes and beliefs by the
employee and is based largely on the correct socialization of the individu-

al.

Perrow discusses this form of control as one aspect of a three part

typology he outlines.51

This includes i) direct control, which consists
of fully obtrusive acts such as giving orders, direct surveillance and

rules and regulations; ii) bureaucratic controls, which are based on

27

factors which are fairly unobtrusive such as specialization, standardiza-
tion and hierarchy, and iii) fully unobtrusive controls which seek to
control the cognitive premises underlying action.

Perrow suggests that unobtrusive controls operate throughout organiza-
tions but are most important at the top because managerial work there is
often less routine. He notes that,

"Premise controls are most important when work is non-routine
(since such work cannot have standardized inputs, throughputs,
and outputs, and cannot be specialized, nor governed by rules)
and this is one reason scientists and other professionals have
such latitude in organizations. Their premises are well set in
training institutions and professional associations... This is
why social class, ethnic origin and social networks are so
important - they make it more likely that certain kinds of
premises will exist...Further down the hieragghy, bureaucratic
and direct controls increase in importance.“

With respect to Residential Counsellors, the existence of unobtrusive
controls is readily apparent in the overwhelming sense of "service to the
clients" reported by these workers in the interviews conducted with them.
They are subjected to a rigorous training period during which they are
thoroughly instructed as to the "premises" appropriate for guiding RC
behaviour and decision making. As members of an identifiable group of
health care workers, they are further inculcated with the proper "premises"
of their particular station through the constant reinforcement received
during interaction with co-workers, both formally during staff meetings
etc., and informally in the context of the social interaction which these
people engage in. There is a clear understanding of the expectations
attached to the RC's role, including an understanding of what type of
behaviour is pr0per for an RC and what is not.

The RC's position, at the lower end of the health care hierarchy in

the particular institution being studied, is indicative of an increasing

number of professional/technical jobs. As such, the current research

28

affords an opportunity to examine the operation of these unobtrusive
controls among this particular group of workers. Many of these occupations
do not lend themselves very well to other forms of control. Unlike the
clerical workers, for example, there is neither the possibility nor much to
be gained from any additional fragmentation of these jobs. Moreover, since
little equipment is used by the RC's in the performance of their duties,
they are not candidates for increased control through technological means.
Management is forced to rely on these workers to carry out their roles in a
desirable and efficient manner, largely of their own accord.

Rules, regulations and procedures do exist for these workers, however,
their value is always subject to the interpretation of the particular
situation by the RC. This fact reflects the uncertainty and unpredictabil-
ity which is characteristic of their occupations and the reality of having
to work with human beings as subjects. The RC's have to be able to assess
and respond appropriately to a vast and constantly changing number of
demands. Purely direct or bureaucratic controls would prove ineffective in
this case since each circumstance requires a unique solution which must
nevertheless, fit into the overall structure of expectations within which
the RC's must work.

The specific type of control which operates in the case of the RC's
creates a work situation which is particularly volatile. This is due to a
number of contradictions inherent in the operation of the unobtrusive type
of controls described above. Specifically, this includes the expectation
on the part of management that the RC's will perform in a responsible and
"professional" manner in carrying out their duties, especially in those

instances which vary significantly from the Center's day to day routine.

29

This would occur, for example, in the handling of crisis situations involv-
ing the clients and for which no previously established procedures exist.

On this dimension, the RC's job resembles that of the "professionals"
described above by Perrow. They have a great deal of latitude and decision
making power in the organizations in which they work. On the other hand,
however, as workers at the lower end of the health care hierarchy, the RC's
jobs have been standardized and routinized as much as possible and are the
focus of innumerable rules, regulations and procedural practices. The
interaction of these dual control mechanisms, i.e., the unobtrusive and the
more obtrusive ones, often results in conflicting demands being placed on
the workers as well as providing them with divergent status cues. Thus, in
some instances, these workers are expected to act independently and exer-
cise their judgement in handling a difficult situation. Most of the time,
however, they are required to follow standard operating procedures very
closely and are fairly rigidly controlled in this. The altruism called
forth by the former "professional" behaviour is dashed in the later circum-
stance. Many of these worker find this particularly frustrating and in
some instances of worker-management confrontation, a work to rule campaign
by the workers is used to emphasizes the extent to which the organization
expects them to behave as "professionals" without providing them with the
benefits which usually accompany this status.

The use of unobtrusive types of control has become increasingly
prevalent as the number of professional/technical jobs has grown. This
practice is also used extensively among such middle level white collar
workers as teachers, nurses and social workers. In fact, as the state of
the economy deteriorates and the "fiscal crisis" in which the state finds

itself intensifies, these workers will be subjected to increasing amounts

30

of control and closer scrutiny.53 Their superiors will be forced to
account more carefully for the resources which are expended and since staff
payroll comprises the bulk of the expenditures in the organizations which
employ these types of workers, the pressure on the staff will undoubtably
grow!

The potential for confrontation, given these kinds of considerations,
is quite high. This has already been demonstrated in visible, if institu-
tionalized, forms of behaviour engaged in by these workers such as strikes,
etc. Other types of workers response to this situation go largely unre-
ported, however, since most occur within the confines of the organizations
themselves and are therefore hidden from view. While some descriptions do
exist of the strategies adopted by blue collar workers in response to
similar situations, little has been reported with respect to either lower
or middle level white collar workers in this regard. The strain generated
by the high level of "professionalism" expected of these workers, coupled
with the small amounts of control they actually exercise in their day-to-
day routines, creates a potentially explosive situation. The manner in
which these workers respond to this situation is of particular concern in
the present investigation.

Summary:

A review of the major components which comprise the present study may
be useful at this point so that the various dimensions of the investigation
outlined above can be placed in a more cohesive context. To begin with,
the present work is chiefly concerned with the problem of worker alienation
and discontent. This problem began to gain increasing attention following
the unrest and agitation in the labour market during the late sixties and

early seventies. This was evident in the growing number of strikes, the

31

high turnover and absentee rates, the plummeting productivity figures etc.
which were taking place at that time. The response to this situation by
business, labour and government leaders was to try to find the cause of
this unrest and to quickly put an end to these problems.

The domestic situation was adversely affected by the mounting pressure
on the economy from the competition emanating from abroad. Unemployment
rates were soaring and inflation seemed out of control. In addition to all
of this, the oil embargo and energy crisis further exacerbated the problems
of an already unstable economy. The nation was floundering in the middle
of a deep recession.

Many observers, at the time, identified the source of the problems at
work with the changing attitudes and rising expectations of the new, young,
highly educated workers. These workers were demanding much more from their
jobs than simply their paychecks. For some, the attitude of these new
workers spelled the death of the work ethic in America. For others,
however, the challenges and criticisms raised by the new workers provided
the opportunity to examine the conditions of work in an entirely new light.
The meaning and importance of work in a person's life became a matter of
much concern. These ideas eventually provided the impetus for the develop-
ment of the “quality of working life" movement.

The major thrust of the "quality of working life“ movement, revolved
around the elimination of worker alienation through the humanization of
work. This required that work be designed in such a way as to maximize
human potential through the creation of desirable, challenging and satisfy-
ing jobs. One of the principle ways of achieving this goal was to ensure
that the workers had a say in the decisions that affected them at work. It

was deemed important that they be able to exercise control over their work

 

.
On—

a;
-|

vi».

 

 

Ii
.1

 

 

32

life. In this way, employee participation in decision making and workers'
control formed central features of the QWL movement.

Another response to the problem of alienation which arose at this
time, was based on the premise that many of the dirty, heavy industrial
jobs which caused alienation were being rapidly replaced by new “white
collar" jobs in the expanding service sector of the economy. It was felt
that these jobs would provide people with more interesting, challenging and
rewarding work, especially since they were to entail a greater degree of
control and discretion for the workers. Unfortunately, while the number of
jobs in the tertiary sector increased, few offered people the kinds of
opportunities which had been predicted. Most of the new white collar jobs,
in fact, were in the lower echelons of this segment of the labour market
and they offered the incumbents very little in the way of control over
their work lives.

The Residential Counsellors which were selected for study in this
research project are representative of many of the lower level professional/-
technical occupations that developed during this period. For example, the
age, sex, work experience and job qualifications exhibited by these workers
are comparable to the characteristics found among workers in many related
occupations at the lower end of the white collar, service sector component
of the labour market. This makes the RC's especially suitable for the
present study.

An additional reason for selecting the Residential Counsellors as
subjects for the present research project has to do with the type of
control which they experience at work. This has been described as "unob-
trusive control" and is based on the manipulation of the "premises" used in

decision making. This type of control strategy reflects a growing trend in

33

the labour market since more and more of the new occupations are not
amenable to more traditional forms of control.

As the "fiscal crisis of the state" intensifies, these control tactics
will be expanded and this will result in increased scrutiny over the job
performance of many lower and middle level workers in the service sector.
The response of these workers to the mounting pressure has already been
evidenced in their willingness to use traditional working class tactics.
The way that this affects their behaviour during their day-to-day work
experience is the subject of the current investigation.

We began this section of this report with a quote from
Fredrick W. Taylor which suggested that there is a great variability in the
behavioural responses of people at work. This continues to exist despite
attempts made to alter this situation. We went on to suggest that very
little has changed in this respect during the sixty or more years since
Taylor made his observation. The purpose of this research is to examine
and describe the various factors which affect the behavioural strategies
adopted by people at work. In particular, this will focus on the manner in
which various "quality of working life" variables affect the behavioural
response of this group of lower level professional/technical workers. The
Principle concern which underscores this entire investigation is worker
alit-mation and this is related in the present research project to the
co"trol that people exercise at work. This, in turn, is related to the
Opportunity which work affords people for the satisfaction of various human
neEds including basic needs such as food and shelter but also higher order

needs which involve the use of wide range of human skills and abilities at

work.

34

The satisfaction of human needs at work is examined with respect to
the workers' perception of authoritarianism, autonomy and democratic
supervision. This is also related to the orientations that these workers
have towards their jobs as well as to the verbal and behavioural responses
that they make at work. In this way, the focus on the control that people
exercise at work becomes a pivotal concern of this study. This is evident
in the major variables employed in this research and these are discussed at

length below.

35

CHAPTER TWO

Theoretical Framework and Review of the Literature

In the preceding chapter, we discussed a number of issues related to
the problem of worker alienation. Of major importance was the nature of
workplace organization and the struggle which has been waged over control
of work. In the present chapter, some of the more salient issues related
to these concerns are examined in greater detail.

This discussion begins with a consideration of the meaning and applica-
tion of the concept of alienation. The impact of alienation of both
Scientific Management and the Human Relations movement is then examined.
This is followed by an assessment of the ideas which underscore the quality
0f working life movement.

Much of this discussion is based on the work of Marx, particularly in
terms of his concept of alienation as well as his analysis of class antago-
nisms. His work represents a major contribution to our understanding of
these ideas and thus warrants careful consideration. This is especially
imPortant in the present context given our focus on the struggle for

cObtrol of work and worker alienation.

1: Alienation.

Marx makes his most succinct statement on economic alienation in the

1

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. The role played by human

activity as wage labour forms the basis of this analysis. For Marx, people

36

create themselves and the world that they live in through their own activi-
ty. It is the uniquely human qualities expressed in this activity which
differentiates human beings from other animals. Faunce discusses Marx's
conceptualization and notes that,
"Particularly in his early writing, Marx was influenced by
Hegel's idea that there is a "universal essence of man" which, as
it is realized, constitutes the "self fulfillment of mankind."
According to Marx, this process takes place only through produc-
tive or creative labour... It is through labour that people
should achieve their full potentialities."

Marx develops his discussion of alienation by describing how people
are alienated in the process of production. In this context, he notes that

alienation occurs when people sell their activity as wage-labour since
this activity no longer belongs to them but exists as something external
and 'alien'. Thus people neither assert nor create themselves in this
activity but turn their life activity from a means of expressing their
humanity into a means of simply staying alive.

Besides being alienated in the process of production, Marx notes that
people are also alienated from the products that they produce. That is,
the products they produce as wage labourers, no longer belong to them but
confront them as alien and external entities which have power over them.
The more a person produces, the greater the number of products in the
world, the less he or she can have. As a result, the producer becomes
increasingly devalued.

Marx describes the process of alienation in the following manner,

"the product is indeed only the resume' of the activity of
production. Consequently, if the product of labour is aliena-
tion, production itself must be active alienation - the aliena-
tion of activity and the activity of alienation. The alienation

of the object of laboug merely summarizes the alienation in the
work activity itself."

37

In addition to being alienated from the process and products of their
labour, Marx notes that people are alienated from their 'species being'.
This activity no longer represents a means of expressing their uniquely
human qualities and characteristics, but simply on instrumental task.

Marx also describes the alienation of people from other people. This
occurs as people confront each other and the products that they produce in
an impersonal market. In this instance, both the people and the products
meet each other as commodities that are in competition. What had been a
genuinely human interaction becomes transformed into an uneasy, suspicious
and often antagonistic set of relationships between 'objectified', alien
'things'. People no longer relate to each other as members of the same
species in these relationships but only as commodities in an impersonal
market situation.

Marx's delineation of these four dimensions of alienation places his
conceptualization squarely within the parameters of his economic analysis.
He argues that the existence of alienation in fact, forms the basic catego-
ry of the capitalist mode of production, namely private property. He
describes this in the following way,

"private property is thus derived from the analysis of the
concept of alienated labour; that is alienated man, alienated
labour, alienated life and estranged man. We have, of course,
derived the concept of alienated labour (alienated life) from
political economy, from an analysis of the movement of private
property. But the analysis of this concept shows that although
private property appears to be the basis and cause of alienated
labour, it is rather a consequence of the latter..."

Marx's analysis of the reciprocal relationships between alienation and
private property typifies what Ollman has described as the 'relational'

quality of Marx's analysis.5 For Marx, understanding social reality meant

approaching it from a wholistic perspective. Specific components of the

38

whole can be isolated and singled out for analytical and heuristic pur-
poses, however, this is, in effect, only an artifical process of abstrac-
tion. The part being examined makes sense, that is, it has meaning, only
as part of the larger whole from which it was extracted. The "whole", in
this case, is Capitalism.

Ollman points out that the specific type of practice employed by Marx
throughout his analysis is based on what he terms the "Philosophy of
Internal Relations." This, according to Ollman underscores Marxs' entire
conceptual scheme. He describes this as follows,

"The relation is the irreducible minimum for all units in Marx's
conception of social reality. This is really the nub of our
difficulty in understanding Marxism, whose subject matter is not
simply society but society conceived of 'relationally'. Capital,
labour, value, commodity, etc. are all grasped as relations,
containing in themselves as integral elements of what they are,
those parts with which we tend to see them externally tied.
Essentially, a change of focus has occurred from viewing indepen-
dent factors which are related, to viewing the particular way in
which they are related in each factor, to graéping this tie as
part of the meaning conveyed by its concept."

This 'relational' aspect of Marx's analysis is vitally important in
any consideration of the other categories employed by him as well as for
understanding his conceptualization of alienation in particular. This
orientation to social reality necessitates the adoption of a wholistic
point of view, for example, such that wage-labour connotes both the exis-
tence of the labourer as well as that of the capitalist who buys his
labour. Similarly, 'private property' not only defines the existence of
identifiable physical objects, but also the specific nature of the re-
lations which exist between people as well as that which exists between
people and 'things'.

What are manifest as logically independent factors at the level of

appearances, exist 'relationally' in Marx's scheme, only as parts of larger

39

clusters of factors. In addition, the dialectical nature of these re-
lations are such that each factor derives its meaning from and at the same
time confers meaning upon the whole. In this way, alienation has no
meaning apart from the relations found in a system of capitalist production
and this implies, in turn, that factors such as capital, wage-labour,
commodities, value, etc., etc., are defined themselves by alienation. The
subsequent characterization of each of these factors taken together consti-
tute the essentials of the relations which comprise the capitalist mode of
production.

The affect of alienation is poignantly expressed by Marx in the
following classic passage from his work,

"within the capitalist system, all methods for raising the social
productiveness of labour are brought about at the cost of the
individual labourer; all means for the development of production
transform themselves into means of domination over, and exploita-
tion of, the producers; they mutilate the producer into a frag-
ment of a man, degrade him to the level of an appendage of a
machine, destroy every remnant of charm in his work and turn it
into a hated toil; they estrange him from the intellectual
potentialities of the labour-process in the proportion as science
is incorporated in it as an independent power; they distort the
conditions under which he works; subject him during the labour
process to a despotism the more hateful for its meanness; they
transform his life-time into working-time, and drag his7wife and
child beneath the wheels of the Juggernaut of capital."

In his analysis, Marx describes the conditions which give rise to and
includes among them; the concentration of the means of production in the
hands of a small but dominant capitalist class; production for exchange in
an impersonal market versus the production of use values for the satisfac-
tion of human needs; and an increasingly complex division of labour charac-
terized by specialization and the separation of mental from manual labour.8
Each of these has specific consequences for the concept of alienation.

The concentration of the means of production into fewer and fewer

hands resulted in more and more people being dependent on the sale of their

4O

labour for a livelihood. This exemplifies the nature of the emerging class
relations of the time which were expressed in both the production process
as well as in the general social structure. These relations reflect the
inherent contradictions found in the capitalist system, and focus on the
ensuing struggle over control of the labour process.

The second condition outlined by Marx focuses on the profound impact
that production for an impersonal market has on the labour process. Since
production is no longer based on the needs and desires of the producers in
this system, but on the vagaries of unknown market forces, the major
consideration in the actual process of production is the realization of a
profit. Thus all other concerns are rendered secondary and this leads to
the dehumanization of all factors of production including the people
involved. The following statement by Rinehart makes this clear,

"prices and profits become the ultimate determinants of the means
and ends of production, and people are compelled to make de-
cisions based on pecuniary gains...human considerations are
secondary to those of efficiency, productivity and profitability.
Working people are evaluated according to market criteria. From
the view of the employer, they become another cost of production.
Workers thus becoge commodities like any other object which is
bought and sold."

Additionally, as a result of the response by workers to this kind of
treatment, capitalist employers were compelled to employ various means in
their attempts to subjugate workers to their own ends. This included the
rationalization of the labour process, the introduction of machinery and
other technological improvements, an increase in the division of labour and
the separation of mental from manual labour. Each of these measures, in
one way or another, attempted to consolidate the control that the capital-

ist class was able to wield over the labour process. But as history has

revealed, this attempt was not always successful nor complete!

41

The rationalization of the labour process coupled with an increase in
the division of labour served to reduce the power of the workers in a
number of ways. Essentially, this came about through the reduction in the
skill level required of individual workers. In this way each worker was
rendered much less valuable as well. The training needed to do the job was
drastically reduced in this process and this meant that workers could
easily be replaced. Taken together these measures served to reduce both
the bargaining power of the individual worker as well as the knowledge of
the production process upon which this power is based.

This situation was further exacerbated through the separation of
mental and manual labour. In this practice, all thinking, creativity and
control over the production activity is removed from the purview of the
individual worker and relocated within the company's planning or layout
department. As a result, the worker is left with little to say over what,
where, how or how much is to be produced. The worker is reduced, in this
process, to a mass of bones and muscles detached from a mind. Human
development through work activity is nowhere to be found in a system that
turns workers into automatons!

With respect to the incorporation of machinery and other technology
into the labour process, it will be argued below, that rather than serving
to increase efficiency and productivity, the specific technological changes
which have been introduced reflect the expressed nature of the production
relations and are not designed to maximize efficiency as much as control
over the labour process.10

The particular manner in which technology is used for control purposes
is described by Edwards as “technical" control. This includes the manipu-

lation of the machinery as well as the physical environment in the control

42

over the worker. This is perhaps nowhere more evident than in an assembly
line application in which the machinery establishes the nature of the task
to be performed, the speed it is to be performed at, the tools to be used
as well as the place it is to be done in. This is usually accomplished by
providing each worker on the assembly line with the proper equipment and
raw materials required to be able to perform the assigned tasks. Workers
in this situation never have to walk more than a few feet to obtain what
they need. In some cases, individual work stations are identified by
boldly coloured paint stripes on the floor which demarcate the end of one
work station and the beginning of the next and workers are not permitted to
leave their assigned stations during working hours. These types of mea-
sures clearly demonstrate the control functions which they are intended to
perform.

In the discussion above, various aspects of 'technical' control over
work were outlined. The struggle which developed over this type of control
reflects the alienation which it engenders through the systematic attempt
to strip workers of their control over their own activity as well as in the
workers actions to resist this type of control. The implications that this
has for the present study is based on the importance of work in peoples'
lives and the responses that they make to work.

Alienation, as a dialectical concept, describes not only the attempt
to subjugate workers to managerial control, but also the struggle which
workers have waged against these very practices. Thus alienation identi-
fies both the problem and the source of its solution. Work should be an
activity in which people use their skills and abilities and grow and
develop as human beings. When the range of expression of people's activity

at work is not in their own control; when the work process is beyond the

43

control of the people who actually do the work; alienation is the result.
The struggle which exist in the workplace often reflect the attempt by
workers to humanize their work and to regain some control over their own

work lives.

II. Applying the Concept

The concept of alienation has experienced a long and varied history
which both precedes and follows Marx's conceptualization of it. As it
developed, it acquired such a wide variety of meanings and interpretations
that today, many critics no longer consider it useful for scientific
research. It has been described as being close to"a shorthand expression

n11

for all socially based psychological maladies of modern times. While

some have called for a clarification of the concept, others suggest that it

12 This warrants a

be eliminated entirely from the sociological literature.
careful examination of these charges as well as an explicit specification
of the manner in which the concept is being applied in the present re-
search.

An exhaustive examination of the charges levelled at the concept of
alienation would take us too far afield of our present concerns and prove
counterproductive in the long run. However, a consideration of several
fundamental issues directly related to the use of the concept in the
current research will be addressed. These focus on the manner in which the
concept can be successfully utilized in research applications and include
the following concerns: i) the issue of whether alienation is primarily a

structural or psychological concept ii) a focus on the role that control

over one's work activity plays in the construction and application of the

44

concept in conducting social research iii) the importance of work activity
for human growth and development and the satisfaction of human needs.

The question of whether alienation is essentially a structural concept
or a psychological one contains several key issues which need to be con-

13 To begin with, perhaps the most prevalent usage of the term in

14

sidered.
sociological research is based upon Seeman's conceptualization of it. He
outlined five dimensions of alienation which included: i) powerlessness ii)
meaninglessness iii) normlessness iv) isolation and v) self-estrangement.
This construct has been widely applied in the study of alienation and in
particular in the study of industrial workers. Blauner's oft cited study
is typical in this regard as he applies Seeman's model of workers invarious
industrial settings.15
This orientation to the study of alienation has been criticized on a

number of grounds.16

To begin with, this research depends upon the actor's
ability to articulate the subjective perceptions of alienation. This is
seen as problematic for a number of reasons. Deutscher, for example, has
demonstrated the difficulty in relating what people say to what they

actually do.17

The relationship between people's responses on an attitudi-
nal survey and their behaviour at work falls into this category.

While this criticism points out the problems with attitudinal research
in general, the concern here focusses specifically on the way that this is
related to the expression of alienation. Some theorists have argued that
the concept of alienation is based on the structural relations which people
encounter at work. Measures of people's psychological responses to work
thus represent one, and not necessarily the most useful indicator of the

existence of alienation. Rinehart makes this quite explicit in the follow-

ing statement,

45

"Structural alienation means that work is not organized in
accordance with the needs and interests, talents and abilities of
working people. However, a complex set of psychological, cultur-
al and social forces influence the degree to which individuals
RECOGNIZE the sources of alienation, ADAPT to alienating work,
and EXPRESS verbally and behaviourally, their disenchantment with
work. Obviously, not all working people are conscious of their
alienated position in work organizations in the sense that they
are able to locate and articulate the socioeconmic factors
responsible for it. But all workers in objectively powerless
circumstances do possess an ALIENATED CONSCIOUSNESS in that they
directly experience and are acutely aware of the EFFECTS of
structural alienation such as repetitive and insecure jobs,
insufficient wages and arbitrary work rules. The test of the
existence of alienated mental states is to be found not so much
in the ability of the individuals to articulate the causes of
alienation but pgimarily in their verbal and behavioural reac-
tions to work."

Archibald has made a thorough analysis of this issue and provides some

19 He notes that Marx mixes the normative and

valuable insight into it.
descriptive uses of the concept in his writing. In some instances, Marx
uses the concept to condemn the subservience of individuals to the capital-
ist mode of production while in other's he uses the concept to describe the
effects that this system has on individuals such as being treated like
commodities or being repulsed by their work, etc. Archibald suggests that
in one sense, alienation reflects the separation of individuals from their
human potential but that in another, it connotes some clearly identifiable
features of the relationships which exist between individuals and their
work, their products, other individuals, etc., etc.20
The conclusion which Archibald draws from his analysis is that aliena-
tion can include both structural factors as well as psychological re-
sponses. Neither can be dismissed but both must be understood as part of
the larger processes within which they are found. They reflect the nature

of the work organization which exists as well as the social, political and

economic context in which they occur.

46

The conceptualization of alienation being employed in the present
research is consistent with that outlined by Rinehart in which he describes
alienation as:

"a condition in which individuals have little or no control over
(a) the purposes and products of the labour process, (b) the
overall organiza§ion of the workplace, and (c) the immediate work
process itself."

As was noted above, Rinehart considers the existence of alienation to
be manifested in both the verbal and behavioural responses which people
make to work. In this way, the concept is related to the nature of the
social relations of production which exist and the resulting worker behav-
iour is considered as part of an ongoing process of interaction which takes
place in a larger social context. This gives the behaviour meaning beyond
that of particular responses exhibited by isolated individuals. Workplace
organization becomes a central factor in the analysis of alienation in this
way and locates it directly in the social structure of the society.

This formulation is particularly useful if forms of hostile or unco-
operative behaviour are examined since their explanation is not reduced to
instances of maladaptation among the individuals involved but is understood

22 In

as a specific response to a distinct set of social circumstances.
some instances, this behaviour may reflect the frustration of a disgruntled
individual however, it may also be indicative of a much more organized
response to the workplace. In either case, this is an empirical question.
The model being adopted here facilitates these types of questions being
addressed.

An alternative manifestation of alienation is also identifiable by
employing this construct. This consists of very passive responses to work

in which the worker has completely withdrawn from this activity, and

approaches it in an explicitly instrumental manner. This may, in fact, be

47

indicative of an extremely alienated response since this activity no longer
holds meaning for the individual concerned. Given the importance placed on
work activity in the present study, such an eventuality may represent a
form of resignation. Workers who get upset or angry about what is going on
in their jobs may be showing that they still care about them and are
desirous of change. Hostile responses in particular, may represent at-
tempts by the workers to challenge the control of management and in some
way to regain some control for themselves. Apathetic or passive responses,
on the other hand, demonstrate no such intent. They reflect alienation
nonetheless.

The second concern outlined above focussed on the relationship between
control and alienation. This underscores much of the present analysis and
is seen as a vital component of the concept of alienation. In our dis-
cussion of Marx's work, the role played by the exercise of free and sponta-
neous human activity was defined as a central theme recurring throughout
his model. Alienation was said to occur if this activity ceases to be free
or as is the case with wage labour, no longer 'belongs' to the individual
worker.

The definition went further than simply describing various dimensions
of alienation and included a dialectical and relational component which
suggests that while particular forms of workplace organization produce
alienation, workers struggle to resist this control. Moreover, management
is compelled to increase its subjugation activity over the workers, pre-
cisely because they resist being alienated. This struggle is the result of
the inherent contradiction which exists and this helps us to understand the
form that the resulting social interaction takes. Edwards describes simple

hierarchical, technological and bureaucratic control in this sense.23

48

It is important to note at this point that the history of labour-
management relations has been characterized by recurring violence and

24

struggle. Conflict and not cooperation best describes the prevailing

relations. A great deal of this conflict occurred especially in the past,

25 What had once been

over the exercise of control over the labour process.
the exclusive domain of the workers was slowly, deliberately and often
brutally stripped from them and taken over by the capitalists. However,
this usurpation by management was usually never very easy nor was it
complete. The continuing labour battles of the last two centuries testify
to this fact.

The link between the present conceptualization of alienation and the
concerns of the present research come about through a consideration of the
changes which have occurred in the organization of work. In particular,
this reflects the conflict which has accompanied the attempt by management
to gain control over the labour process. It includes an examination of the
various developments which have significantly affected the organization of
work as well as those which have resulted in the existing relations between
management and labour. The conditions which have given rise to such
proposals as the "quality of working life" and demands for workplace
democracy are equally important in this context.

Since the turn of the century, there have been a number of develop-
ments which have fundamentally altered the nature of the organization of
work. Each has attempted to address the inherent conflict found in the
existing production relations. Each has also attempted to expand the
ability of management to direct the labour process. While most of the
developments which are discussed in the subsequent sections of this report

have be initiated by management, it is clear from the evidence cited that

49

workers did more than simply react to managerial initiatives and quite
often were the original cause of management's actions. Moreover, the
predominantly managerial view exhibited by many authors working in this
field gives the impression that the events which have taken place have
unfolded according to some predetermined management plan. Nothing could be
farther from the reality. In fact the history of the labour process
reveals a constant and ongoing struggle in which both management and labour
have striven to attain their respective objectives. It is in the workers'
struggle to overcome alienation, to humanize work, and to regain control
over their activities in the workplace that we may best see the importance
of a definition of alienation which focusses on the struggle to control
work.

It is no mistake that work is organized the way it is in this society.
The expression of control at work in particular, demonstrates the attempt
by management to consolidate and maintain a position of dominance in
labour-management relations. This is reflected in the establishment of the
types of production systems which have consciously and deliberately max-
imized and emphasized their control over the labour process. Control
therefore, has been a primary feature of the form that work organizations
have taken in this society since the beginning of capitalist industry.
Marglin, for example, has suggested that the move away from a cottage
industry to a factory based system was due to the following concerns:

l. The physical control afforded by the factory served to minimize

the level of potential employee embezzelement.
2. The rate of speed of work could be significantly increased.
3. Technological change could be used for capital accumulation as

well as for the most obvious function of immediate use.

50

4. Production of the whole process rested with the owner of

capital.26

The rest of Marglin's analysis goes on to demonstrate that quite apart

from any alleged gains in efficiency or productivity which were attributed
to this type of production system, control over the production process

27 Thus the move

looms as the overriding consideration behind the move.
from the putting-out system and cottage industry to the factory system had
more to do with consolidating the position of power of the owners than it
did with demands of technological necessity or efficiency.

This analysis suggested that both the organization of production as
well as the particular technology employed reflect the desire to control
the labour process. In this context, Clegg and Dunkerely note that tech-
nology is indeed anything but a neutral component of the production pro-
cess, since a great deal of variability exists in the design and selection
of what particular form of technology is utilized. Brecher and Costello
concur and make the following observation in this regard,

"The key to understanding the workplace as it is experienced day
to day is to recognize that it is shaped not only by the work to
be done, but also by management's need to control those who do
it. Insecurity of employment, the managerial structure, the
selection and organization of equipment, the assignment of tasks,
the hierarchy of jobs, the form in which worker's are paid --
these basic structures of work in our society, far from express-
ing any "technologicag necessity" are used as a means for the
control of workers."

They go on to demonstrate that the increased efficiency gained as a
result of the implication of assembly line production techniques can be
placed at roughly seventeen percent. They indicate that much of the gains
made with the use of these techniques is due to the sheer "speed-up“ of the

work process which is under the control of management in this system rather

than from any technological breakthrough inherent in the assembly line.

51

They suggest that detail work predates this form of work organization and
that the modest gains realize by this system come at a very high cost,
especially when human costs are considered.

A similar argument can be made with respect to the complex structure
of organizations. Edwards, for example, points out that there is an
essential difference between co-ordination and control and suggests that it
is entirely possible to construct large scale, complex organizations which
are based on a co-ordinating set of organizational principles as opposed to

29 He also notes that the

ones that are established primarily for control.
control functions extant in complex organizations are designed to fulfill
the interests of those who manage or direct their activities. Once again,
this analysis suggests that the particular forms that organizations take
reflect more the concerns of the managers of these organizations to maxi-
mize their control over them rather than any considerations based on their
superior efficiency.

The requisites of large scale, complex organizations include a sub-
stantial capacity for administrative processes which are essentially
facilitative in nature and which require co-ordination more than control.
The control factor expressed in organizations, according to Edwards, gives
rise to many of the problems of alienation which were discussed above.
These problems stem largely from the fact that workers lose the opportunity
to express their skills and abilities at work since they make few decisions
regarding the work process. This situation derives not so much from the
inherent demands of the size or complexity of the organization as it does
from the attempt by the masters of these organizations to retain control

over them.

52

Perrow expresses a great deal of concern over this situation, espe-
cially in terms of the implications that this has for society in general.
He describes organizations as "tools" in the hands of their masters and is
quite disturbed by the lack of accountability which exists over these
extremely powerful entities. He argues that the rationality embodied in
these large scale, complex organizations may in fact be quite rational from
the point of view of the masters of these organizations but that it may be
quite the opposite for the people who work in them or for the people that
are served by them:

Max Weber described the extreme form of work organization which he
observed in America as substantively irrational.30 Substantive rationali-
ty, according to Weber, refers to the satisfaction of the needs and require-
ments which are necessary for the organizations' continued existence. When
this is examined with reference to any given society, the institutions of
the society in question are then substantively rational if they provide for
the satisfaction of the needs and requirements of both the people in the
society as well as of the institutions themselves.

Formal rationality by contrast, refers only to the continued function-
ing of the organization irrespective of the needs and requirements of the
society of which it is a part. While substantive rationality has been
described as the "efficient coordination of collective action", formal
rationality reflects the I'logic of domination".31 The former serves both
formal and substantive functions in society while the latter represents a
particularly dangerous situation since it completely neglects the satisfac-
tion of basic needs. The result is that such a system operates very
"efficiently" in terms of domination, but if fails to meet the very require-

ments for which it was originally established.

53

Faunce has identified a number of problems which he relates to the
development of large scale, industrial societies. Among these he includes:
an emphasis on continuous economic growth; a high level of structural
differentiation; a low level of structural integration; the existence of
large scale, complex work organizations and bureaucracies; rapid social
change; and rationalized control structures.32 He goes on to note how
these conditions affect the self-esteem and status assignment processes in
these societies. He then describes the deleterious effects that this has
in terms of alienation from work and outlines such behaviour as apathy and
over-conformity, etc. in this context.

In many respects, the concerns described by Faunce reflect the lack of
control which people in these types of societies have over their lives.
This is especially evident in the workplace since many largescale, complex,
bureaucratic organizations provide few opportunities for the people who
work in them to exercise control over their work. The analysis presented
above suggests that it may be possible to have these types of organizations
while at the same time avoiding the problems currently being experienced.
This would be possible, for example, if these organizations were controlled
by the people who work in them such that they exercised control over their
work. The implication of this is that problem related to such things as
size and rapid change may be minimized if a majority of the people most
affected by these factors were both knowledgeable about and had some
control over their outcomes.

The importance of control over work represents the essence of the
present application of the concept of alienation. In the various examples
discussed above, the particular forms that organizations have taken in this

society were examined with respect to the manner in which control was

54

manifested. Both considerations of the specific technology employed as
well as the very structure of the organizations themselves were related to
the desire of the owners and managers of these organizations to retain
control over them. This was held to obtain irrespective of any claims
based on technical necessity

The consequence of this situation is that most working people have
little or no control over their lives at work. It is in this sense that
Rinehart's definition of alienation is particularly useful in terms of
applying it to social research. The function of control is never absolute,
such that people in various occupations experience different amounts of
control over their work. Additionally, people are not passive objects and
the reality of the control function in any existing organization may be
quite different from that which appears on an organizational chart. These
represent the types of empirical questions for which this application of
the concept of alienation is most useful. This knowledge should provide a
clearer picture of how our organizations operate as well as an indication
of how the people who work in them make sense of their working lives.

The consideration of control over work leads directly to an examina-
tion of the third factor described above which focussed on the importance
of work for human development and the satisfaction of human needs. The
application of the concept of alienation in this context refers specifical-
ly to the inherent relationship implied in this concept between human
growth and development and the exercise of skills and abilities at work. A
conceptualization of alienation based on the notion of self estrangement,
is consistent with these concerns.

This usage of the concept revolves around the important possibilities

which work provides people for the expression of their unique

55

characteristics. It is through the use of their powers and abilities that
people satisfy their human needs. This includes their more basic needs for
such things as food, shelter and clothing, as well as for their more
explicitly human needs for such things as emotional and cultural expres-
sion.

Ollman suggests that people grow and develop in the process of using
their powers in the satisfaction of needs. This occurs as needs are
satisfied and new needs are developed which in turn call for the use and
development of further powers and needs in an ongoing progression. This
possibility however, does not exist for a great many workers in this
society. The organization of work affords few of these people the possibil-
ity of engaging in this type of activity. Faunce specifies the importance
of this aspect of alienation in the following passage,

"The fact that we cannot achieve self-fulfillment unless we
control the events that shape our lives, i.e., unless we are
"the author and actor of our history"; the importance of
creative work in this process; and the extent to which the
contemporary industrial order involves work that can only

be experienced as a means to other ends - these are theme's
from Marx'§3view of alienation which we have selected for
empha51s."

The satisfaction of needs therefore and the satisfaction of higher
order needs in particular reflects the ability of people to control their
own lives and especially their lives at work. The extent to which this
occurs should be indicative of the importance that people attach to work in
terms of their own evaluations of self worth and the development of self
identities. In this society, occupations in which people have a great deal
of discretion and exercise considerable control over work are usually more
highly valued. A person who occupies this type of position is more likely

to derive positive images of self and base his or her definition of self

worth on this valuable role. A person for whom such an evaluation is not

56

possible, on the other hand, is less likely to place much importance on the
work role in terms of the satisfaction of such higher order needs, the
development of self identity, or self actualization.

The structure of the labour market in this society precludes the
satisfaction of these higher order needs for a majority of the members of
the labour force. In the present conceptualization, this follows from the
lack of control that most people have over their work. When people are not
able to use their skills and abilities to their fullest, they are restrict-
ed in the extent to which they can develop their human powers as well as in
their ability to satisfy increasingly higher order needs. This reduces
work for many people, to a merely instrumental activity. This use of the
concept of alienation relates the control over work directly to concerns
over human growth and development. The extent to which people can develop
higher levels of skills and use a wide range of their powers at work is
related to the extent to which they exercise control over their work. For
a great many people few such opportunities exist. In this sense, the
present study seeks to examine how people perceive the organizations in
which they work and how this in turn is related to their verbal and behav-

ioural responses to work and to the satisfaction of their needs.

III. Alienation and Control: Taylor and Scientific Management.

We begin this part of our discussion with a consideration of the work
of Winslow Taylor. His work represents an important starting point since
it has had a significant impact on the way that work has subsequently been
organized in this society. While Taylor's "domain assumptions" are clearly

visible in his approach to labour-management relations, he does, in a naive

57

way, attempt to address the conflict which he saw existing between labour

34 A brief examination of his personal background is

and management.
instructive at the outset of this investigation since it allows some
insight into the manner and personal motivations of the man. It is to this
examination that we now turn.

Fredrick W. Taylor was the son of a wealthy Philadelphia lawyer. He
had made preparations to enter Harvard when,

"he suddenly dropped out, apparently in rebellion against his
father, who was directing Taylor toward his own profession, the
law. He then took a step quite extraordinary for anyone of his
class, of starting a craft apprenticeship 3g a firm whose owners
were soc1al acquaintances of hlS parents."

From these rather inauspicious beginnings, Taylor quickly made his way
up the factory hierarchy and was soon appointed 'gang' boss over a group of»
machinists. This vantage point afforded him a first hand look at the
conflict which occurred in the workplace. He was particularly disturbed
with what he saw and became especially concerned with the practice of
"soldiering". This involved the deliberate restriction of output by the
workers, a situation he could scarcely tolerate. It is not difficult to
understand either his repulsion of this type of activity or the vigor which
he expressed in his efforts to eliminate it considering his class back-
ground and what Braverman has described as his "obsessive-compulsive"

personality.36

He was determined to get as much output from the factory's
machines as was humanly possible and he was quite willing to fight the
workers in the plant in order to do so. After describing a confrontation
that he had had with a number of workers over this very issue, Taylor
stated the following.
"Now that was the beginning of a piecework fight that lasted for
nearly three years, as I remember it - two or three years - in

which I was doing everything in my power to increase the output
of the shop, while the men were absolutely determined that the

58

output should not be increased. Anyone who has been through such
atflgbt knows and dreads the meanness of it and the bitterness of

Taylor felt that the production process could be organized to the
mutual benefit of both labour and management and an end could be put to the
needless waste caused by the constant conflict which he had seen. This
could be accomplished however, only after management had gained control
over the labour process. He realized that workers would not go along
willingly with this transfer of power so he sought to win their co-
operation by introducing a system of piece rate incentives. These, he
thought, would convince the workers to participate in his plan if for no
other reason than for self interest. This formed an important part of his
management plan which he named "Scientific Management".

The production process, according to Taylor, was rife with unnecessary
conflict. What was required was a method of organizing production which
was both rational and efficient. For this, Taylor turned to the methods of
science which he had studied as an apprentice machinist. He proposed that
the conflict between management and labour could be resolved in much the
same way that engineers solved their problems only, in this case, the
problem revolved around what constituted both "a fair day's work” and "a
fair day's pay." This could be calculated, according to Taylor, by apply-
ing the dictates of science. Once the question had been settled by the
objective machinations of science, neither management nor labour would have
reason to dispute the findings and both could begin to cooperate for their
mutual aggrandizement.

Taylor felt that management would gain through ad0pting his proposals
since the productivity of the workers would be greatly increased. Workers

would also reap a number of benefits from their cooperation with his plan.

59

To begin with, the piece rate system which was to be implemented would
insure a greater financial return for workers. Additionally, he argued
that workers would benefit from this arrangement since they would share in
the increased productivity which a scientifically designed work process
would provide. Another benefit for the workers was the opportunities that
the newly designed system would afford since many more would be allowed to
gain the skills of machine operators thereby moving them beyond the lower
labourer classification to which most had been restricted up to that time.

Taylor's ideas about human behaviour were based largely on a very
narrow model of "economic man". In this conceptualization, people were
acting in a "maximizing" way. They were identified as being completely
rational, calculating agents who respond positively to economic incentives.
When the logic of "Scientific Management" is examined against this back-
drop, it is clear that Taylor relied quite heavily on economic self inter-
est to convince both workers and management to adopt his plan. Perhaps
what is most instructive about this approach is that he was certain that
the method that he was proposing was itself rational and efficient and
therefore above the petty disputes and conflict so characteristic of the
labour-management relations of his day.

An additional component of Taylor's ideological scheme must be ad-
dressed. It was quite clear from his own calculations that the gains which
would result from the introduction of a scientific labour process, would
not be shared equally by labour and management. At best, the increased
wages which would be returned to the workers from piece rates, represented
only a small portion of the increases gained through worker productivity.
What's more, he realized that the contest between labour and management

would not end with the introduction of piece rates but would only renew

60

itself since as piecework or "incentive" systems allow the workers to
increase their pay,...the output records...determine the setting and

38 In this way, the struggle is perpetuated ad

revision of pay rates.
infinitum.

Taylor understood this to be true because he realized that workers who
were engaging in 'soldiering' were in fact acting rationally, while at-
tempting to protect their own best interests. In fact, Braverman notes
that when Taylor was asked by workers whether they should turn out more
work, he answered that,

"as a truthful man, he had to tell them that if he were in their
place he would fight turning out any more work, just as they were
doing, because under the piece-work system they would be allowed
to earn no more wages than theyghad been earning, and yet they
would be made to work harder."

The other aspect of this interaction which should be noted, is that
Taylor felt that this situation was right and proper. Thus the company
should get as much as they could from both its capital - including fac-
tories and machines - and the labour that it purchased. In addressing the
issue of distributing the gains which resulted from the increased produc-
tivity, Taylor felt that the knowledge used to develop the new scientific
methods belonged to management since it had spent it's capital in conduct-
ing the experimentation needed to create the new system. Therefore, like
its factories and machines, management should benefit from the new methods.
Workers, on the other hand, had no claim to them for they could not afford
the capital required to develop them. What's more, if the workers' should
happen to discover a new, more efficient method of production by shear
chance, they were certain to keep it from management to protect their own

self interests. In this way, only management could be relied upon to

further the rationality and efficiency of the production process.

61

Since its introduction, Taylorism has had a profound impact on the way
that work is organized in this society. As Clawson notes,

"What for Taylor was clearly a conscious process, and at one
important level remains a conscious process, is now at the same
time unconscious in that it is accepted without question (by both
management and workers) as the self-evident way to organize work
processes aga is seen as "natural," “inevitable," or simply "most
efficient.“

Both Braverman and Clawson agree that the influence of Scientific
Management was not to be found in the limited applications that it experi-
enced as a system of management but rather in the "way in which Taylorism
marked a fundamental change in the control of the labour process."41
Actual cases of Scientific Management's implementation were restricted to
small, non-unionized enterprises since it was largely ignored by the
industrial giants of the day. However, as was noted above, when seen as a
set of ideas about how the production process should be organized,
Taylorism's impact cannot be overstated.

In most cases, Scientific Management was fought to a standstill by
workers wherever it was tried. It lead to such a bitter and violent strike
at the Watertown Arsenal in New York State, for example, that it prompted
the United States House of Representatives to hold special hearings on
Taylorism and other systems of management and their introduction into
government arsenals! Taylor himself reported on the vigorous opposition he
experienced in attempting to implement his plan. He describes the follow-
ing interaction:

"Everytime I broke a rate or forced one of the new men whom I had
trained to work at a reasonable and proper speed, some one of the
machinists would deliberately break some part of his machine as
an object lesson to demonstrate to the management that a fool
foreman was driving the men to overload the machines until they
broke. Almost every day ingenious accidents were planned and
these happened to machines in different parts of the shops, and

were, of course, laid to the fool foreman whgzwas driving the men
and the machines beyond their proper limit."

62

In discussing workers struggles such as these, the tendency is to
identify the workers' behaviour as reactive, as a response to management's
actions. This is especially significant in terms of the present research
which focuses specifically on the behavioural responses of workers. As
Clawson notes however,

"Workers' activities were not derivative from what capital did:
they fundamentally shaped what happened. Indeed, what capital
did (specifically including Taylorism and the rise of bureaucra-
cy) is hardly comprehensible except as a response to workers' 43
success in reSisting prev1ous capitalist attempts at control."

In his discussion of the labour process, Edwards comes to much the
same conclusion. That is, that attempts to control workers have led to the
development of increasingly more complex systems of control by management,
as less sophisticated forms of control are rendered ineffective by workers'
actions. He traces the development of control systems from "simple"
control to more recent examples of "bureaucratic" control. This is partic-
ularly important in the present context since bureaucratic control has
become a dominant form of control over work and especially among profes-
sionals and other white collar workers.44

When examined in this light, the legacy of Taylor is not entirely
clear. As a response to the actions of workers, more specifically to
'soldiering', Taylorism did result in the establishment of an extremely
more complex system of control than the one which had previously existed.
Moreover, that the ideas underlying this system of control became so
widespread and accepted reflects the tremendous impact that Taylorism did
have. On the other hand, however, the fact that these ideas were adopted
so readily indicates that management needed a more sophisticated means for

controlling the behaviour of workers since the one that they had was

ineffective.

63

Perhaps the most significant consequence of Taylorism lies in its
relationship to the existence of alienation among workers as well as in the
attempts by workers to overcome this alienation. The widespread resistance
to Taylor's method demonstrates the inherent conflict which exists in the
production process under capitalism and this method has been identified as
a major source of the alienation which this system generates.45

The workplace that Taylor described contained only a few workers who
were "willing to give the company their all." It should not be surprising
that this situation has not changed much despite the attempts to increase
management's control over the labour process. This is especially true in
the case of Taylorism. As Mills notes,

"At the dawn of the twentieth century, Fredrick Taylor, often
referred to as the father of "management science,“ urged dividing
human and machine labour down into the smallest and easiest
functions: to create dumb, foolproof jobs for dumb human beings,
whom he characterized as essentially lazy, greedy, and demanding
of discipline... To suggest that the old ways [Taylorism] aren't
working any more is an overstatement. But to suggest they're not
working as well as they used to, even twenty years ago, is not.
And to suggest that in these days of our troubled economic
history, an ever more urgent need is rising for a new way to win
back the organizational involvement of the new breed of working

men and women - with their more educated demangg and needs for
human dignity - is perhaps an understatement.“

IV. Alienation and Control: The Human Relations Movement.

A second major attempt to deal with the organization of the workplace,
began to grow out of the work of Elton Mayo and his associates during the
late 1920's. This has become known as the Human Relations Movement and it
has also had a decisive impact on the way that work is organized in our
society. Many of its proponents continue to be quite active in this field.
In fact, the ideas upon which this approach is based have provided the

impetus for much of the current managerial thinking and practice.

64

While conducting experiments on the effects of various environmental
factors on worker productivity, Mayo and his colleagues discovered that
people at work were very much affected by social factors.47 For example,
they found that regardless of how they manipulated the lighting or the
length of rest periods in an experimental work situation, worker productiv-
ity continually went up. After pondering such perplexing results for some
time, they began to realize that the productivity increases that they were
observing were not due to the changes in the physical environment at all
but rather that

"... the real change had been that management had taken an
interest in the two groups of workers [being studied]. They were
given special treatment and status as compared to the rest of the
workers. The attention apparently raised moralg and morale
raised productiVity. It was a happy thought!"

This now famous discovery has become known as "the Hawthorne effect"
and it has had a tremendous impact on the way that we think about people's
behaviour in organizations. In contrast to the propositions of the "eco-
nomic man" model of human behaviour found in Taylorism, this work demon-
strated the fact that people respond to more than simply economic motives.
Social factors and sentiments make up an important component of human
behaviour and must be taken into account when trying to understand the
behaviour of people in organizations.

In addition to social factors, Mayo and his associates documented the
importance of work groups as well as the operation within organizations of
an informal structure along side the formal one. These discoveries had to
be taken into consideration when the problems of work were addressed since
they provided important insights into the functioning of organizations.

The logic underlying the Human Relations approach is seductively

simple and compelling. Basically stated, it notes that workers who are

65

happy and who are treated well at work, will have high morale. Further-
more, workers with high morale are more productive and cooperative. The
task before management, therefore, is simply to find ways of keeping
workers contented. According to this line of reasoning, conflict in the
workplace and behaviour such as “soldiering” would be eliminated if workers
could be kept happy. The two principal methods developed for accomplishing
this goal were i) establishing "good human relations" in the organization
and ii) practicing "good leadership".49

The idea of establishing good human relations follows directly from
the assumptions of this approach. Thus, the Human Relations theorists
believed that it was necessary to appeal to more than the economic inter-
ests of the worker. These alone were not enough to convince the worker to
cooperate with management's goals. Workers had to be treated properly and
attention had to be paid to their social nature.

The concept of "good leadership" puts these ideas into practice since
being a good leader means being democratic and humane; able to understand
and communicate with your workers. Good leaders rely upon example and not
force to accomplish their objectives. It must be noted that this repre-
sented a considerable departure from the established management practices
of the day which were based almost exclusively on authoritarian relations
with employees.

Support for the Human Relations approach was gained through hours of
careful and extensive observation by Mayo and his research team. They
found, for example, that even 'soldiering', which had been understood
previously only in economic terms, was greatly influenced by informal group
pressure at work. They noted that,

"a "fair day's rate" was established informally [by the workers]

66

and policed by the group; "rate bustersgowere subject to ostra-
cism, sabotage and physical reprisals."

In this context, 'soldiering' took on a substantially different
meaning from the one implied by Taylor's analysis. The informal structure
of the work group must be taken into account if this behaviour is to be
understood for what it really is. At the very least, it indicates that
economic incentives alone are wholly inadequate for resolving the conflict
in the workplace which is exemplified by behaviour such as 'soldiering'.

In fact, the conscious, deliberate and planned nature of this activity
casts conflict in the workplace in an entirely new light. Workers were
seen to be engaging in self-protective behaviour as a group. Their activ-
ities were not the mindless acts of frustrated individuals but rather well
orchestrated attempts by collectivities of workers to retain some control
over the work process.

The Human Relations approach took this into consideration, to some
extent, and sought to appeal to the workers' social sentiments through
their values and attitudes about work. Rather than using the blunt edge of
force on the workers, as Taylor had done through his use of piece rates and
the "technical control" of the labour process, the Human Relations propo-
nents employed more subtle techniques aimed at persuading and convincing
workers to cooperate. They were certain that the informal structure of the
organization could be turned to management's advantage in this endeavor,
even if it only resulted in neutralizing some of the negative behavior of
workers. Human relations theorists saw this as the least cost method for
controlling the conflict in the workplace. It represented the best way of
getting workers to go along with management's decisions and goals.

The ideological posture reflected in the Human Relations approach has

led many critics to point out its excessively manipulative character.51

67

Some, in fact, have charged that the approach is little more than manage-
ment attempting to convince workers to cooperate in their own exploitation.
This is particularly distasteful, since by extension, this approach implies
that any activity which workers engage in which contradicts management's
agenda is by definition non-rational. The actions of management, on the
other hand, are seen as inherently rational and legitimate. This includes
participation in activities which are clearly not in the worker's own
interest. Kerr voices his objection to this type of reasoning when he
states,

"We cannot accept the view that rationality and initiative are

vouchsafed only to the elite and thagzthe common man is left only

the Virtues of faith and obedience."

In recent years, Human Relations theorists have expanded their view to
encompass a larger institutional perspective. While relying on the basic
ideas described above, their emphasis has shifted from individual leaders
and workers, to include a consideration of the actions of larger groups in
the organizational complex. Recent examples of this approach place the
responsibility for a positive organizational climate on all groups in-
volved, from upper level management to workers on the shopfloor. This has
emphasized the role of the organization's structure itself in enhancing
worker morale. Examples of these types of programmes include job enrich-
ment, job enlargement and participative management.

The idea that workers should be treated decently by the organization
is being broadly translated in the current version of this theory, as
follows; the organization should do what it can, within bounds of course,
to provide workers with decent work, i.e., work fit for human beings to do.
In addition, workers should be treated as human beings and perhaps even be

allowed to have some say over what they do at work; that is, as long as it

68

doesn't affect productivity. This is a striking departure from the machine
model introduced by Taylor in which workers were reduced to disembodied
labour power.

Perhaps the most critical point of this entire discussion is that the
underlying assumptions of the Human Relations approach have changed very
little since they were first developed. While more "technical" terminology
is introduced and a more sophisticated methodology employed, the basic
premises remain the same. Happy workers produce more, so do what you can
to keep the workers happy!

The major problem with this approach, as with Taylorism, is that
neither address the source of the conflict between management and labour.
In fact, Taylor came much closer to this than do Human Relations theorists,
since he realized that as long as workers retain control over the labour
process, the conflict would go on. He struggled, therefore, to strip
workers of this control, by encorporating their knowledge of the labour
process, the well spring of their power, into the company's planning and
layout department. The Human Relations approach, by comparison, does
little more than deflect and mask the conflict, by treating the symptoms of
its continued existence.

The failure of both the Human Relations model and of Taylorism, in
this respect, is evident in the continuous struggle which goes on between
management and labour. In spite of the efforts of a wide variety of
"management experts", worker alienation and discontent permeates most
sectors of the labour market.

The authors of Work In America were particularly critical of Taylor's
method. They are no less critical in their appraisal of the Human Re-

lations approach. They note that this approach concentrates on the

69

enterprise as a social system in which workers are to be treated better.
They suggest however, that "their jobs remain the same" and that "neither
the satisfaction of workers nor their productivity is likely to improve
greatly from the human relations approach."53

Modern manifestation of the Human Relations approach fare little
better than their predecessors. Commenting on the viability of programmes
such as job enrichment and participatory management, a spokesperson for the
AFL-CIO finds little difference between the old and the new. He states
that "much of what is passed off as new in the current surveys of worker
dissatisfaction is an updating of the findings of Elton Mayo." He goes on
to note that,

"The impetus for time and motion studies is pretty much the same
as that behind job enrichment or participatory management.
Substituting the sociologist's questionnaire for the stopwatch is
likely to be no gain for the workers. While workers have a stake
in productivity it is not always identical with that of manage-
ment. Job enrichment programmes have cut jobs just as effective-
ly as automation or engineer's stopwatches. éfld the rewards of
productiVity are not always equ1tably shared.

The skepticism expressed by this union official about recent Human
Relations strategies, demonstrates the concern which exists among organized
labour over attempts to alter the labour process. The reasons for this
distrust reside in the fact that experience has taught them that the new
programmes may be nothing more than another attempt by management to gain
control over the workers. Lessons about cooperation and piece rates were
learned very quickly by workers and are not easily forgotten. This has
meant that many new initiatives are given a luke warm response by many
labour groups. A case in point involved a group of American auto workers
who were sent to Sweden to work in the Saab-Scania engine plant which had

introduced production processes much different from the assembly line

techniques practiced in the United States. In the Swedish plants, the

70

workers were given more autonomy and responsibility and worked in teams as
opposed to on assembly lines. The lack of enthusiasm about this work
process on the part of the American workers, was widely reported in the
press. The sentiments of these workers to the new methods is summed up
succinctly in the following comment by one of these workers.

"If I have to bust my ass [for the ggb] to be meaningful, forget
it; I'd rather [it] be monotonous."

The meaning that work holds for these auto workers reflects the
insight they have into the labour process. Their apparent lack of mo—
tivation and the instrumental orientation they demonstrated to their work
may be a result of their understanding of the inherent contradictions in
the organization of production. As the quote shows, the meaningfulness of
work does not appear to be a high priority if it is gained only through
increased output. Thus, the relationship between new methods such as job
enrichment and job enlargement, and increased productivity, has not been
lost on these workers; obviously many do not think the trade-off in in-
creased autonomy is worth the extra effort required.

The crisis in the workplace of the late 1960's and early 1970's
sparked a tremendous amount of investigation of work-related problems.
Large numbers of sociologists and industrial psychologists descended on the
workplace in an effort to analyze these problems and the failure of earlier
attempts aimed at controlling the conflict in the workplace. Curiously,
the main focus of much of this research was on individual workers and the
supposed causes of “job dissatisfaction". Unfortunately, in most cases,
much of this effort proved less than fruitful. Also, renewed efforts in
the Human Relations area have not shown promising results either. In an

article in the Harvard Business Review, Thomas Fitzgerald offers an

71

assessment of why programmes based on the Human Relation model or what he

calls "motivation theory" do not work. He states the following,
"The fact that there is some congruence [between individual needs
and organizational goals] can be readily admitted, but this does
not change the tension that exists anymore than does the recogni-
tion of the inconsistency of certain needs within the individual
himself. The difficulty is that attention to improving attitudes
and undesirable behaviour is usually directed at surface symptogé
without Significant attempts to correct the underlying source."

We would concur with Fitzgerald's assessment that what is required is
a correction in the underlying source of the conflict in the workplace.
Studying worker dissatisfaction alone is not enough. In order to accom-
plish this, it may be necessary to go much further than Fitzgerald intend-
ed. The conflict which exists in the workplace must be understood in the
context of larger social structural and historical processes. Only when
examined in this way can the basic relations of production in society
become the centre of focus. The resulting analysis would then address the
vary nature of these relations in order to locate the source of the con-
flict.

In the quotations cited above, both the representative of labour and
business, pointed to the inherent contradictions which exist between labour
and management in this system of production. One suggests that while
workers do have a stake in production, it is not always identical to
management's. The other notes that there is some congruence of goals
between the worker and the organization but that this does not change the
tension that exists. A more radical interpretation of this relationship is
provided by Edwards who suggests that,

"conflict exists because the interests of workers and those of

employers collige, and what is good for one is frequently costly
for the other."

72

Edwards locates his explanation of labour-management conflict in a
broader discussion of Marx's Labour Theory of Value. He notes, in this
regard, that employers in Capitalist economies, purchase labour power in
the market place. Labour power, according to Marx's definition, is the
worker's capacity to do work and is usually measured in time units i.e.,
number of hours or days, etc. But, as Edwards notes, the capacity to do
work and the actual amount of work which gets done, are two entirely
different things. Herein lies the source of the potential conflict. Since
in a situation in which workers do not control their own labour, and for
whom work is not a source of intrinsic need satisfaction but merely a
source of wages, "any exertion beyond the minimum needed to avert boredom

58 For the employer, on the other

will not be in the worker's interests."
hand, the more production that can be wrung out of the purchased labour
power, the farther ahead he or she will be. This is true for the Capital-
ist without limits. These two interest therefore reflect the inherent
contradiction in this system of production.

An additional source of strain, which flows from this relationship, is
the continuous pressure on the Capitalist to be competitive in the market
place. This is based, largely, on the extent to which the Capitalist is
successful in extracting surplus value from his or her employees. In
Marx's analysis, surplus value is the difference between the value actually
produced by the worker and that portion of the production which is returned
to the worker in the form of wages. The difference between these two
amounts represents the capitalist's profit.

Competition in the marketplace compels the capitalist to continually

reduce the price of his or her commodities in order to retain a share of

the market. The difficulty here is that this must be accomplished without

 

n"

,-

73

threatening the level of profits obtained. This feat can be carried out in
a number of ways. For example, one way to lower prices without reducing
profits is to lengthen the working day without increasing the wages paid to
the employees. This practice, however, is restricted by a number of
factors, including both the natural limits of human capacity for work as
well as the organized resistance of workers to this type of strategy.
Nevertheless, this practice has been adopted in many instances in the past.
For the reasons mentioned above however, it has not proven very effective.
The second way of increasing surplus value is reducing the labour time
necessary to produce the equivalent of the worker's wages. According to
Mandel, this results in an increase in 'relative surplus value' based on

59 This usually comes about

the growth in the productivity of labour.
through the employment of new machinery, the implementation of more ratio-
nal methods of work, a more advanced division of labour, etc. However,
this possibility is itself restricted by the need for large amounts of
capital to buy new machinery and/or the resistance of workers to these new
methods. In addition, advantages gained by employing this method are soon
lost as other capitalists acquire the same equipment, etc.

According to Mandel's analysis, the growth of 'absolute surplus
value,‘ on the other hand, is the result of the intensification of labour.
That is, "the worker is obliged to expend in ten hours of work, the same.
productive effort as previously he expended in thirteen or fourteen hours.
Such intensification can be brought about by various methods: speeding up
the pace of work; speeding up the machinery; increasing the number of
machines to be watched (e.g., looms to be overlooked in textile mills),

n60

etc This type of strategy has been used much more often in the past

and in fact, reflects the practices of Taylorism described above. In many

74

cases, the conflict in the workplace occurs precisely over the implementa-
tion of these practices.

This discussion of the inherent conflict between labour and management
has been based on a Marxist analysis of the labour process. The utility of
this conceptualization for research in the study of labour-management
conflict, over other possible models which could be adopted, is discussed

61 These authors note several advantages

at length by Edwards and Scullion.
which the Marxist approach has over the other approaches for research in
this area. They suggest, for example, that this particular perspective
provides a valuable historical framework within which developments in the
labour process can be examined in terms of the conflict in the workplace.
Additionally, they argue that by locating conflict in the workplace in the
very structure of the labour process itself, the source of the conflict is
specified and a material basis for it established. They list a number of
problems which this procedure avoids and indicate that,
"a crucial starting point in the analysis of conflict lies in the
recognition that the forms on which labour power is expanded
constitutgza basic conflict of interest between employers and
workers."
The third point made by Edwards and Scullion is based on the concept
of the "effort bargain". This refers to the actual amount of effort that a
worker will expend at work. While employers bargain over the rate of pay
workers are to receive, no bargain is made over how much effort shall be
expanded for a particular wage. This becomes particularly evident in such
behaviour as 'soldiering', which we noted was the deliberate restriction of
output by workers. In this context, 'soldiering' represents another aspect

of the basic conflict of interests in the labour process which must be

taken into account.

75

Finally, Edwards and Scullion point out that a further benefit of
adopting a Marxist perspective in this type of analysis accrues from the
fact that it allows the behaviour of workers "to be viewed in a more
rational light." This can be explicated by using the example of 'soldier-
ing' once again. Self-preserving behaviour such as soldiering can be seen
as much more than merely negative or hostile behaviour or even the reaction
of frustrated individuals to a particular work situation. This type of
behaviour can be seen instead in the context of an "overall strategy of
resistance" and specifically as self-protective and rational behaviour on
the part of workers. This seems to be consistent with much of the litera-
ture cited above which notes the relationship between worker behaviour and
the resulting managerial response, i.e., usually newer and more effective
control systems.

These authors note that there are several problems with the Marxist
formulation. In particular, they point out the ease with which specific
actors and actions such as soldiering are identified "as direct forms of
resistance to an existing control system" but note that it is "more diffi-

cult to show that this is so."63

Despite the difficulties, however,
Edwards and Scullion conclude that this perspective is the most useful one
available for this type of analysis.

In our discussion thus far, we have reviewed the developments of both
Taylorism and the Human Relations approach. These have been identified as
specific forms of managerial response to the conflict and resistance found
in the workplace. In the case of Taylorism, for example, it was shown that

control over the labour process was itself the prize in the struggle

between labour and management. It has also been suggested that the

76

emergence of this system of control could be attributed to the failure of
earlier control machanisms to deal effectively with worker resistance.

Similarly, the development of more recent forms of managerial control
have been related to the failure and inadequacies found in Taylorism
itself. Thus in discussing the impetus for the emergence of the Human
Relations programmes of recent years, Clegg and Dunkerely note that,

"The changes that have occurred have been almost totally manage—
ment imposed changes, brought about largely through the increas-
ing costs of scientific management (absggteeism, turnover,
reduced productiVity, poor quality etc.

Once again the existing mechanisms of control, in this case scientific
management, were rendered inadequate, in management's eyes, due to the
resistance and conflict which were occurring in the workplace. It must be
borne in mind however, that the range of possibilities for various types of
managerial response is restricted by the existing social conditions of the
historical period in which they occur. Thus, while lengthening the working
day would have been possible in the early stages of industrial capitalism,
it is less likely to be used in a situation in which workers hold consider-
able power in the form of union organizations or in which they have the
force of the law on their side, such as in the present context.

This situation is also true of more authoritarian forms of control
which have been used in the workplace, such as those described by Edwards

l."65

as "simple contro This system of control is particularly costly since

it requires the close and constant supervision of employees. Even when it

66 In addi-

is applied, there is no guarantee that it will be effective.
tion, this form of control presupposes the existence of a labour force
which will submit to the types of coercive tactics which are characteristic

of such a system of control. This type of system is especially

 

and

uh-

77

inappropriate in labour markets populated by an increasing number of white
collar workers.
The problem for management at this point therefore, was to find a
system of control which could respond to the conflict in the workplace more
effectively than Taylorism and yet which would remain attuned to the social
circumstances of the day. It is in this Specific context that the Human
Relations approach experienced a renewal.
"The work humanization or neo-human relations [approach] has a
direct lineage from the early Hawthorne experiments, but equally
can be seen as an adaptation of Taylorism to the new conditions
of struggle in production, with the aim of preserving the prof-
itability of capgtal rather than a radical revolution of the
labour process."

IV. Alienation and Control: Recent Developments

The recent developments in the Human Relations approach can be seen as
providing one type of solution to the problems in the workplace. Rather
than reverting to increased 'technical control' as Taylor had done, these
theorists revived the ideas of Elton Mayo. They sought to influence
workers (and thereby gain a measure of control over their behaviour) by
appealing to their social nature. Programmes which advocated participation
of the employees and the designing of more humane jobs, were not motivated
by some altruistic concern over the well being of workers but rather with
the level of profits enjoyed by the companies which employed them. As
Clegg and Dunkerely note,

"What the Human Relations theorists did was to produce a highly
developed ideological apparatus of normative coggrol, of
hegemony, for the management of organizations."

The importance to this body of work therefore lies in the fact that it

provides management with a means of exercising control at work which is

effective and inexpensive (since no expensive technology is required) while

78

at the same time it legitimizes the very actions taken to extend its
control over the production process. The logic encapsulated in the partic-
ipatory programmes asserts the appropriateness of management's goals by
making the workers' own livelihood dependent on their continued cooperation
with management. Any other conclusions by the workers are rendered non-
rational in this type of logic. It can be noted then that,
"the Human Relations movement has significance not as a body of
scientific findings of a highly dubious nature, but as part of
the apparatus whereby organggations attempt to impose and main-
tain control of production"

As we noted above, the strategies developed by the Human Relations
theorists sought to alter the interaction at work by appealing to the
social nature of the workplace organization. It was also pointed out that
this practice was deemed highly manipulative by many critics of the ap-
proach. The workers themselves soon learned that these programmes were not
all that they appeared to be at first sight. In fact, many union organiza-
tions became vigorous in their opposition to human relations efforts.

This has also occurred with neo-human relations programmes such as job
enrichment and participatory management. This was heightened by experi-
ences that the labour movement had with "company unions", particularly in
Great Britain.70 These types of “unions" were used in the early part of
this century to effectively block the development of indigenous workers'
organizations in the companies which created them. They served largely to
legitimate company activity to workers. In addition, they were an effec-
tive channel for any conflict which existed, thereby acting as an addition-
al check on worker behaviour in the interests of management. Workers who
were members of these company unions were often coopted into explaining and

defending the company's position on contentious issues.

79

Another problem which concerned union people was the effect that the
new human relations programmes had on the union's authority. Since the new
participatory programmes resulted in direct contact between the worker and
the company, many union leaders saw the role of the union being undermined
by these programmes. The more "participatory“ the plans were, the more
they seemed to place the legitimacy (and power) of the unions in question.
The unions did not sit idly by however but challenged the new programmes
wherever they appeared.

The situation described thus far, reflects only a partial view of the
interaction in the labour process. It is important to bear in mind that
while management was adopting 'new' tactics in its attempt to retain
control over the labour process, the workers and their unions were develop-
ing an agenda of their own. In addition to direct job action, such as
strikes, wildcats, absenteeism, work-stoppages and slowdowns etc., various
elements in the labour movement were beginning to articulate their own
position on the way that work should be organized. This was the result, to
some extent at least, of the apparent failure of the strategy adopted by
the union movement after the Second World War in which productivity bar-
gaining was emphasized over issues of workers' rights to control the labour
process. This position was becoming increasingly unpopular among the rank
and file and proving difficult for the union to defend. The deteriorating
economic climate also made this position untenable in the mid 1970's.

This situation was given further impetus by the arrival of the "new"
workers in the labour market during the mid to late sixties and early
seventies. As was noted in Work In America:

"What these workers want most, as more than 100 studies in the
past 20 years show, is to become masters of their immediate

environment and to feel that their work and they themselves are
important - the twin ingredients of self-esteem."

80

Bolstered by the social climate of the time, the young workers and the
labour movement in general began to call for increased participation in the
decisions which affected their lives at work. "The cries of students for
participatory democracy and of blacks for self-determination [were] heard

"72 This affected the labour movement as the discon-

all over the country.
tent of the workers, and the young workers in particular, began to find
expression in demands for Workplace Democracy and workers' control.

Management's response to the conflict in the workplace had been a
neo-human relations based strategy. Programmes such as job enrichment, job
enlargement and participatory management however proved less than success-
ful. As they became increasingly criticized as manipulative and ineffec-
tive, a new direction was sought. Since authoritarian or coercive methods
were not appropriate in the existing social context, more progressive
theorists began to look at the idea of participation a little more closely
and the concept of workers' control began to gain momentum. In this
regard, Silverman and Yanowitch note that,

“It is significant that the idea of workers' control has re-
emerged in "post-industrial" capitalism and is being given
serious cggsideration by spokesmen for both liberal and radical
thought."

The range of programmes introduced by the neo-human relations theo-
rists and the manner in which various interests were expressed in them,
provided the context within which the convergence of liberal and radical
thought was possible. The notion of workers' control could be adjusted to
meet the requirements of both of these perspectives. The liberal theorists
recognized the problems inherent in the structure of "post-industrial"
society. Resolving the growing problems of bureaucratization and increas-

ing the possibilities for democratic participation in large scale indus-

trial organizations were consistent with the traditional liberal approach.

A;»
D

9“

...

.nr‘

IV

{1
...

...;

\

bu.

 

b\v
\‘1
II

I-
.:r4:

‘ l

81

Their demands for workers' control therefore, reflects their analysis of
the logic of modern capitalist develOpment and this was seen as a viable
means for gradually reforming modern industrial society.74

Radical theorists, on the other hand, defined the renewed interest in
workers' control as a means of rekindling working class consciousness.
Their goals in supporting this movement however, have nothing to do with
solving management's control problems or reforming the system. Instead,
they are aimed at initiating a direct and fundamental challenge to the
control and power of capitalist institutions. Workers' control represents
a strategy for the transformation of the capitalist relations of production
and an attempt to realize socialist goals.75

In this way, and expressing entirely different motivations, liberal
and radical theorists seized upon the idea of workers' control. The
strategy of participation, introduced by the neo-human relations theorists
had struck a responsive chord in the social milieux of the day. This
fostered a number of developments in various directions which the human
relations theorists clearly had not intended for their programmes.76

The support for workers' control touched off a number of controversies
in both the liberal and radical camps however, over potential changes in
the workplace. Since the idea of workers' control was so broadly and
loosely defined, each observer was able to bring a different interpretation
to the situation. Thus it was possible for representatives of management
to adopt the new human relations strategies and claim that workers' control
was being implemented in spite of the fact that the obvious goal of the

particular programme being referred to was to diffuse conflict and to

increase productivity!

hi:

hi
rang:
EV H
. ..
r] 5.!
a. 4.x.

a- o
.r
N.

1"“
\

iii!

v'.

ewe.

 

 

 

82

A great deal of concern was expressed about the effectiveness of these
programmes among liberal theorists, radical theorists and the workers
affected by them. The central issue revolved around the possibility for
real change which workers' control provided on the one hand contrasted with
the potential for manipulation which these types of programmes allowed on
the other. At the same time, the problems in the workplace appeared to
increase, especially after the energy crisis in the early seventies sparked
an economic slump and with the increased competition for Japanese and
German products discussed above. The response by many companies to these
conditions was to abandon these "questionable" (and not profit producing)
experiments and to concentrate on productivity and profits.77

In the radical camp in particular, the debate over workers' control
centered around the issue of whether these programmes did anything to alter
the basic relations which exist in the production process. The ease with
which many of the programmes were abandoned when the economy began to
decline, gave the critics of the plans a powerful example to use in their
condemnations of them. They pointed out that they were implemented, in
most cases, at the pleasure of management and could be halted just as
easily by them.

Marx's analysis of worker self-management schemes and cooperative
systems did not provide support for workers' control either. He noted that
they would be unable to transform capitalist society and that what was
needed was the transfer of society's productive forces into the hands of
the producers themselves. For many, workers' control did not afford the
possibility of this happening. Mandel echoes Marx's position when he
states,

"The fundamental principle underlying self-management ... is
unrealizable in an economy which allows the survival of

[ . -
ful. a P: A .1 . T ..fii -
[i . .D o . .

‘i
.7"
s
I
I

h I. .t in!

83

competition ... it is thus to deceive the workers to lead them to
believe that they can manage their own affairs at the level of
the factory. In the present economic system, a whole series of
decjéions are inevitably taken at higher levels than the facto-

ry.

This position is echoed by Rinehart when he points out that even the
most radical schemes for industrial betterment are not directed at chal-
lenging the basic authority structure of complex organizations. He notes
that employee discipline and control by the organization is never really
eliminated but only removed to a higher level in the management hierarchy
where it is exercised "indirectly" so long as the workers carry out their
new tasks to management's satisfaction.79

Daniel Zwerdling offers an even more specific criticism of managerial
methods including programmes such as job enrichment, job enlargement and
worker participation, (especially as these have been put into operation by
the A.T. and T corporation). He suggests that,

"The small freedoms and decision making powers that companies
like A.T. and T. have granted do make worgomore bearable, but
only because it was so unbearable before.

However, he states elsewhere that there is some hope in this develop-
ment and even much to be gained by workers being involved in the workplace
democracy experiments which are being tried. He states,

"But all of the enterprises described here [experiments in
workplace democracy] offer crucial lessons - both positive and

negative - which can help workers in the future to continue on
the difficult but rewarding journey towards democracy at work."

81

Carole Pateman examined the issue of workers' control by conducting an
empirical investigation of studies which have been carried out on worker
participation. She concluded her analysis by noting that "participation is
a central means of attitude change." She refers to a number of studies

which indicate,

84

"that workplace participation generates general attitudes of
political efficacy necessary to animate democratic citizenship,
attitudes which have not 859" sufficiently developed by parlia-
mentary democracy alone.”

Clawson approaches this issue from a different angle. He argues
against the view that technological demands make it impossible to funda-
mentally change work and suggests instead, that meaningful changes in work
can occur and that work can be satisfying, creative and stimulating while
at the same time highly productive. He cites several examples in which
this occurs when workers have control over production. He refers specif-
ically to the writings of such authors as Blumberg and Hunius who have
documented the positive benefits of worker participation and workers'
control.

Blumberg's findings are particularly illuminating in this context
since he makes some very strong statements about worker participation.
After an extensive survey of studies on participation he states that,

"There is hardly a study in the entire literature which fails to
demonstrate that satisfaction in work is enhanced or that other
generally acknowledged beneficial consequences accrue from a
genuine increase in workers' decision making power. Such a 83
consistency of findings, I submit, is rare in social research."

The efficacy of worker participation programmes was incorporated into
many of the ideas which underscore the quality of working life movement.
The intent of OWL based initiatives, in fact, was to reduce or eliminate
alienation in the workplace by promoting workers' participation. As we
mentioned above, the possibility of eliminating alienation through workers'
participation does not appear possible from a Marxist perspective since
this does not entail any fundamental alteration of the existing relations

of production. It is important to recognize, however, that many QWL

objectives are essentially consistent with the types of changes required to

85

humanize the workplace. This is particularly true of those proposals which
call for the genuine control of work by workers.

The central issue in this regard revolves around the viability of OWL
programmes for reducing or eliminating alienation. As we noted above,
there is a legitimate concern that QWL programmes can have little impact in
a capitalist system. On the other hand, the result of workers experiences
cannot be overlooked. Zwerdling has referred to both the positive as well
as the negative experiences of workers with these types of initiatives.

The effect of these lessons cannot at present be assessed, however, while
QWL does not appear to pose a direct threat to capitalism, it represents
yet another indication of the need to reconstruct the organization of work.
It also shows how the changes in the workplace have moved away from the
authoritarian model introduced by Taylor in the early part of this century.
Thus, it may be seen as another stage in the struggle between labour and
management over control of work. This development is significant since it
addresses the workprocess in more than narrow economic terms or concerns
with productivity by including a consideration of the needs of the workers
involved. This represents a substantial change which is worthy of careful
monitoring in order to gauge its impact on the emerging industrial rela-

tions in this society.

V. Alienation and the Quality of Working Life.

.The serious and continuing economic recession of the early 1980's,
coupled with intensified competition from abroad, created an environment in
which the idea of the "Quality of Working Life." (QWL) began to attract
serious attention. In particular, the growing realization by both big

labour and big business of the disintegration of the post war coalition

86

which was based primarily on sharing productivity gains made the search for
an alternative, acceptable to both, more compelling. This, in turn, gave
QWL inspired programmes an opportunity to develop.

This is perhaps nowhere more evident today, than in the automobile
industry. After struggling through several years of massive unemployment,
enormous losses, wage concessions, poor sales and even poorer quality
production, both the auto companies and the automobile worker's unions
began to recognize that a new arrangement was essential. This lead to many
changes and included the implementation of a number of 'Quality of Working
Life/Employee Involvement projects under the joint sponsorship of the
U.A.W. and such companies as General Motors and the Ford Motor Company.
These projects were given the full support of the top leadership of both
the union and the companies involved.84

The much publicized success of the Japanese style of industrial

85 This model provides

relations has also given QWL initiatives a boost.
both companies and unions, such as those in the automobile industry, with a
working example of one possible way that a production system utilizing both
high technology and "cooperative" labour-management relations can be
established. While some critics of the Japanese model have argued that it
is not quite as "cooperative" as it seems at first glance, it does demon-
strate that an alternative to what exists in this country is at least
possible.86
The present research seeks to examine various dimensions of the QWL in
order to assess their usefulness in the construction of the types of work
organizations which will be required in future. According to proponents of

OWL, those persons engaged in the design of work organizations should be

concerned with both the needs of the workers doing the work as well as with

87

87 The as-

the requirements for efficient and highly productive work.
sumptions upon which the QWL concept rests, indicate that regardless of the
particular political system that a society has, it will need to be cogni-
zant of both of these requirements of work organizations in future. In
their view socialist societies can no more afford inefficient and/or
inhumane work organization than can capitalist ones!

This is especially true of the way that work is organized under
Capitalism for as Reich notes,

"the most profound impact of the commodity system and technology
was on man's own individual being. The visible ravaging of the
land and the social fabric was matched by an invisible ravaging
of man within. Man was not merely alienated from environment and
society, he was alienated from his own functions and needs. His
principle activity - work - ceased to be self expression. He
felt little of the normal satisfactions of work; he was a mere
cog in production; his tasks no longer expressed his abilities.
Man's most basiCBgctivity was dominated by the most impersonal of
masters--money."

Under these circumstances, it should not be surprising that work is
often "shunned like the plague", as Marx noted in his description of
alienated labour. Even Adam Smith was concerned with the consequences of
this type of work organization when he wrote,

The man whose life is spent in performing a few simple operations
of which the effects too are, perhaps, always the same, or very
nearly the same, has no occasion to exert his understanding, or
to exercise his inventions in finding out expedients for diffi-
culties which never occur. He naturally loses, therefore, the
habit of such exertion and generally becomes as stupid and 89
ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to become."

In addition to the consequences that this type of work has for indi-
vidual workers, the results of the resistance and conflict which such work
generates is extremely costly for society as a whole. The type of behav-
iour this implies has already been described above and results in losses
from such things as strikes, wildcats and other work stoppages, absenteeism

and high turnover rates, sabotage and poor quality. Each of these affect

88

the productivity of labour and to the extent that the economic order of a
particular nation is tied into the world market, some nations will pay
exceedingly harsh penalties for low productivity and poor quality, etc.

The permanent loss of thousands of jobs in the American automobile industry
is a case in point. While this resulted from more than worker resistance
and conflict on the shopfloor, these factors did have a significant impact
on these results.

At a more general level of analysis, there is a growing awareness (and
in some quarters concern) over the finite nature of the world's resources.
Spawned in the wake of the energy crisis and ensuing economic recession of
the early 1970's, this awareness has led to the realization that there are
real limits to economic growth and in fact that negative growth is a
distinct possibility. This represents a serious situation for an economic
order predicated upon continued expansion and growth. The need for the
judicious allocation and expenditure of scarce resources therefore is
becoming apparent to many. "In a world increasingly concerned with the
most efficient use of scarce resources, the potential energy and materials
savings are an additional economic benefit of participation programmes.“90

In terms of the present discussion, the message it is clear that the
type of work organizations needed to meet the new challenges cannot support
the waste and inefficiency which has characterized work organizations in
the past. In particular, the costs of an adversarial system of industrial
relations can no longer be sustained. What is required instead, is a
system of production which is both effective and efficient and which does
not generate conflict and resistance.91

A further area of concern, especially among advocates of OWL is the

impact that work has on non-work activity and the realization that the work

89

experience extends beyond the plant gates. This idea was originally
discussed in the academic literature under the rubric of the "compensation
thesis" which held that people could "compensate" for unsatisfying working
lives through their out of work actions.92 This was related in particular,
to the higher wages which were available to the workers in the "monopoly

93

sector" of the economy. It has been suggested that monotonous, boring

and alienating jobs are the price that had to be paid for a higher standard
of living and increased consumption by the working class.94
Research into the relationship between work and non-work behaviour
suggested an alternative to the compensation thesis which pointed out that
what was occurring was a "spill over" of work experience into non-work
areas. Thus, several studies document the correlation between what a

95 This

person does at work and what he or she does when off the job.
notion has been extended in recent formulations by QWL advocates, who
suggest that the overall quality of life experienced by people, depends to
a great extent on the quality of their working lives. They go on to
suggest that there are serious ramifications for a society which ignores
this relationship, in terms of the social costs which it incurs as a result
of poor or undesirable working lives among its citizens.

The clearest example of the social costs related to what goes on in
the 'private' world of work are found in the area of work-related medical
problems. Lauer lists a number of studies which link both mental illness
and suicide to undesirable working conditions.96 He describes a whole
array of medical symptoms which have been associated with job related
stress including such things as "coronary heart disease, migrains, peptic

" 97

ulcers and hypertension . He goes on to note that,

"people who are satisfied with their work ... tend to hgge fewer
of these health problems and even seem to live longer."

90

Further support for this position was presented in the Work in America
report in which job dissatisfaction was associated with such things as low

99 The social costs of these

self esteem, anxiety, tension and worry.
problems is enormous both in terms of the direct costs of medical treatment
and the loss of production which occurs. Lauer adds a further set of
consequences and costs to this calculation when he describes the impact
that undesirable and unsatisfying work have on interpersonal relations and
other social institutions such as families. Problems such as alcoholism,
interpersonal violence and family breakdown are discussed in this context.
He cites one study which suggests that
"many of the interpersonal problems in the workplace can be
traced to the nature of the work. Give any person a dead-end
career ladder, a sense of powerlessness, and a feeling that the
boss and co-workefia are always watching, and he or she will go
rigid and mean."
This analysis is further extended to include the effects of unemploy-
ment and work hazards on workers and the costs that this has for soci-

101 Lauer describes the serious problems which both of these factors

ety.
contribute to and states that,
"when productivity in the workplace declines, the nations economy
suffers and thabzmeans additional problems for a great proportion
of Americans."
Unemployment is then described as having a particularly devasting effect on
people.

The evidence presented in the debate between the proponents of the
“compensatory“ thesis and the advocates of the "spill-over" thesis is not
entirely conclusive. It is clear, however, that what goes on at work is
related to the overall "quality of life" that a person experiences. It is

also clear however, that a person can find gratification and positive

sources of self-esteem outside of the workplace. It appears then, that

91

these two positions may not be mutually exclusive but may reflect a range
of behaviour which people engage in in response to the particular threats
to their self-esteem that they encounter. Thus, if a person perceives an
opportunity to enhance his or her self-esteem at work, then he or she may
choose to invest in this activity. If, on the other hand, no such oppor-
tunities are perceived, people may respond in a number of ways ranging from
passivity to hostility, depending on the contingencies surrounding this
interaction. Conversely, the opportunity for enhancing self esteem may or
may not be present in people's non-work environment. People can choose to
pursue or ignore these opportunities depending on their own circumstances.

The formulation employed in the present research places a great deal
of emphasis on the importance of work as an arena in which human activity
is expressed. When this activity is not perceived as providing the oppor-
tunity for establishing and maintaining a positive self image, a major
portion of people's life activity is eliminated as a possible source for
this process. This aspect of a person's life activity is rendered meaning-
less in this context. In a very real sense, these people are deprived of
this period as a potential time for self related activity. This represents
a major and significant loss given the importance of work in this culture
and the sheer number of hours people spend each day in work related activ-
ities.

One group of people in the QWL movement address this by focussing on
the interrelationship between workers' needs and the socio-technical

environment at work.103

The concern for them, is to design the types of
work organizations which will eliminate the myriad of problems described
above while at the same time providing efficient and productive work

organizations. These two complimentary goals provide for both the

92

satisfaction of the needs of workers while at work and at the same time
ensure a high standard of living through effective production methods.
Unfortunately, in the past, the requirements of increased productivity and
efficiency have been stressed at the expense of the satisfaction of needs.
This situation has resulted, according to these QWL advocates, in the type
of problems described above and must be altered if they are to be resolved.

Many of the studies discussed thus far, have indicated that worker
participation and control provide a viable means for addressing the prob-
lems of alienation from work. Proponents of the QWL approach incorporated
worker participation and employee involvement into their scheme. In many
ways, the assumptions which underlie the concerns expressed by QWL advo-
cates reflect the types of ideas discussed above in relation to control
over work. It is important, at this point, to discuss the various notions
which comprise the QWL movement.

The ideas which underscore the quality of working life movement began
during the late sixties and early seventies. They coincided with the
growing concern at that time over issues related to the general quality of
life in this society. The social upheaval of the sixties had spawned a
lively debate over such issues as human rights, the depletion of world
resources, pollution of the environment, the state of the educational
system, sexual liberation, etc., etc. The nature and quality of people's
experiences at work formed part of this debate and reflected many of its
humanistic assumptions.

As more and more people became interested in the problems surrounding
work and the way in which it is organized, a cacophony of terms began to
emerge to describe the various points of view being expressed. Each

approach defined the problems of work from a slightly different

93

perspective, appealed to a particular audience and expressed specific
concerns. Eventually however, a more homogeneous approach began to develop
and while diversity remained one of its hallmarks there was sufficient
convergence that a 'movement' subsumed under the umbrella term “the quality

104 This underlying diversity makes

of working life" could be identified.

the definition of OWL somewhat problematic since it does not reflect the

ideas of one or even a few individuals but rather encompasses a wide

variety of perspectives, policies and points of view. As Lawler notes,
"Unfortunately, there is no well-accepted or well-developed
definition of the term quality of working life, a fact that is
not surprising since the various groups interested in life in
organizations have quite different vested interests in what such
life is like. Some of these groups are primarily concerned with
the degree to which an organization's work environment motivates
effective job performance, others with the degree to which it
safeguards the physical as well as psychological well being of
employees, and still others with the degree to wbagh it decreases
the alienation of people from work and society."

Each of the interests outlined by Lawler reflects a major constituency
in the QWL movement and mirrors the growing concerns over the importance of
work for society in general. The difficulty in defining QWL arises from
the fact that it is used to refer to a whole host of quite diverse program-
mes, some of which are fundamentally incompatible. This feature of OWL has
been both a source of problems as well as a source of strength since its
vagueness has helped to get the idea of OWL accepted under circumstances
where it otherwise might not have been welcome. The meaning attached to
the term QWL has been so widely construed that its applications range from
such things as the introduction of problem solving groups into the work-
place and the development of quality circles, to the complete redesign of
the socio-technical environment and the call for workplace democracy. As

this list shows, the area which the term encompasses is enormous.

94

In spite of this apparent heterogeneity, some agreement over key
elements of OWL does exist. The most general of these reflect the basic
need to understand work in the broader context of a person's life and to
attempt to ensure that work contributes to the overall well being of the
person and the society of which he or she is a part. Advocates of QWL
stress that it is more of an overall orientation which people have towards
work rather than any specific programme or set of organizational princi-
ples. They describe it as a process which involves both workers and
management in the active reconstruction of their work organizations to
ensure that they are productive and efficient and at the same time sensi-
tive to the needs and aspirations of the people who work in them.

The QWL process contains a number of recurring themes which include
such things as the need to provide workers with decent, humane jobs which
afford them dignity and respect; work experiences which provide them with
the opportunity to grow and develop as human beings; democracy in the
workplace such that people have a genuine opportunity to participate in the
decisions that directly and immediately impact on their lives; and the
establishment of effective and efficient organizational forms.

Faunce has summarized four principles for the "humanization" of work
which he states are typical of the manner in which QWL is defined in the
QWL movement. These include,

1. the principle of security at the workplace "implies the
worker's need to be free from fear and anxiety concerning
his health and safety, income, and future employment";

2. The principle of equity "implies that workers should be
compensated commensurately with their contribution to the
value of a service or product. Lack of equity (e.g., large
difference in income between managers and workers and lack
of sharing in profits) causes resentment and hostility";

3. The principle of individuation implies that "work should
stimulate the development of unique abilities, craftsman-

ship, and the capacity for continued learning... individua-
tion also...means that workers have maximum autonomy in

95

determining the rhythm of their work and in planning how it
should be done";

4. The principle of democracy implies that "wherever feasible,
workers should manage themselves; authoritarian, hierarchi-
cal contfag should be replaced by cooperative, self-managed
groups."

The basis for much of the QWL approach reflects the importance which
this orientation attaches to the meaning of work. The importance of work
and the extent to which it impacts on a person's life has been commented on
by a number of observers. The following statement from Bryant gives an
indication of the scope this is given.

"One's standard of living, style of life, political ideology,

basic orientation, choice of friends and spouse, health, daily

routine, mode of child rearing and general satisfaction with
life, to name only a few considerations, may well be the indi-
rect, if not the direct, results of one's work speciality. We
are shaped, molded, regulated, even assimilated by our work.

Work is our behavioural product, but so, too,15§e we and our

lives in many ways the products of our work."

This should not be surprising considering the fact that most adults
today spend between one-third and one-half of their waking hours either at
work or preparing for it! The tremendous importance that work has for
people therefore, cannot be overstated.

The specific importance placed on work activity as a means for express-
ing uniquely human qualities as well as the potential that it has for human
growth and development, represent an important aspect of OWL.

A great deal of concern is expressed in the QWL literature with respect to
human development, need satisfaction and self-actualization. This is
approached primarily through the conceptualization of a "hierarchy of
needs" developed by Maslow. In fact, in many instances, QWL is measured in
terms of the opportunity that work affords people for fulfilling increas-
ingly higher order needs. It is particularly important in the QWL approach

that this type of situation exist at work.

96

"In Maslow's words, to organize people for work as if they are
"mentally healthy adults seeking self-actualization is, in the
long run and given certain qualifications, the pathogf success of
any kind whatsoever, including finanCial success."

Maslow's theory suggests that people have a needs-hierarchy ladder
moving upwards from primary physical needs such as food, shelter and
clothing, etc., to needs for social contact, safety, and to higher order
needs such as self-esteem and self-actualization. The model implies that
the lower order needs must be satisfied before a person can satisfy higher
order needs.

"As individuals mature, they seek opportunities for self-actual-
ization that is, they seek the freedom to be creative, to develop
1?E;T"ib§]]s to the maximum, to exercise autonomy and the

The nature of the control exercised over the workplace in most tradi-
tionally constructed organizations, whether they are based on Tayloristic
or Human Relations principles or some combination of the two, are such that
they rarely allow the kinds of self-actualizing behaviour described above
to go on. This is especially true as you move down the organizational
hierarchy. What is called for by QWL proponents, is a "genuine" opportuni-
ty for the employees to share in the decision making power which exists in
the organization and which directly affects their lives. This would allow
some opportunity for people to experience self-actualizing behaviour at
work.

In our discussion of the concept of alienation, we focussed specif-
ically on the way that control was exercised in work organizations. As a
matter of definition in this construct, the lessening of alienation should
follow from such practices as workers' control, workplace democracy and to

some extent worker participation. The QWL literature addresses the same

issues but does so from a different point of departure. Rather than

97

focussing primarily on workers and their control of work, the QWL movement,
partially due to its origins, approaches the issue through an appeal to
both management and organized labour to consider the consequences of the
existing industrial relations.

Proponents of OWL often begin by outlining the problems and harm
caused by the old style, hierarchical, authoritarian, control-based model
of workplace organization. They point out the drawbacks of this approach
for both management and labour, including considerations of alienation and
rapidly falling productivity rates and suggest that there are advantages to
be gained in an alternative form of social organization of work based on
QWL principles. Cooperation and not confrontation is presented as the
desirable way of thinking about industrial relations and this is described
in terms of a genuine cooperative effort by both management and labour on a
win-win as opposed to a win-lose basis.

The implications of the scenario outlined above is that power in
organizations is not defined as a finite quantity or "zero-sum" any longer
but is seen instead as an attribute of the organization which can be
effectively utilized to assist the organization in achieving its goals.
Thus, the benefits of cooperative relations are demonstrated through such
programmes as cooperative work groups, worker participation in decision
making and the increased flexibility of the organization gained through
better communications and coordination resulting from non-hierarchical
power structures.110

An additional and perhaps more salient difference between alienation
and QWL follows directly from the different solutions each has concerning
the resolution of the problems they identify. In this regard, the elimina-

tion of alienation is possible only through a fundamental transformation of

98

111 This arises as a result of the

the existing relations of production.
irreconcilable contradictions which are seen as inherent qualities of the
Capitalist mode of production. In the QWL movement, on the other hand,
change is slow and gradual, building on and incorporating various elements
of the existing structure. Concerns over the undesirable consequences of
the existing forms of organization, or over inequality or other contradic-
tions in the system are usually expressed in humanistic terms particularly
as they contribute to the inhumane aspects of work. More often, however,
much of the impetus for this approach comes about as a result of the keen
self interest of the various parties involved especially during times of
economic stress, falling productivity and growing worker unrest. Unfortu-
nately, the worker is quite often rendered a passive by-stander in this
entire process as business, labour, government and even academic concerns,
all seem to precede those of the worker. The "new" programmes are aimed at
the workers however, and they are expected to cooperate. The changes that
are proposed, usually seek to modify, redesign or restructure the existing
system rather than introduce a new one.

Given the differences that exist between alienation and QWL, in what
sense can they be used in the current context? We do not wish to suggest
that they coincide to any great extent, nor that any effort should be made
to make them more compatible. However, in the particular areas in which
they do overlap, notably in their humanistic concerns related to human
development and self-actualization, a number of useful ideas do exist. For
example, the QWL movement has been described above as a 'process' which
attempts to ameliorate the existing conditions in organizations. This
process allegedly results in a "better" quality of working life, however,

we are never explicitly informed as to what this might look like but are

99

presented instead with a number of general humanistic goals, which most
people would find difficult to oppose. These are centered around ideas
which incorporate the importance of satisfying higher order needs in a

112 The concept of

process of self-development and self actualization.
alienation likewise offers an appeal to the need for humans to be able to
develop and grow and satisfy higher order needs through the use of powers
and abilities in the satisfaction of these needs.

The similarity between alienation and QWL is seen in the present study
as resting on the positive evaluation each places on the free expression of
human activity for self growth and consequently on the negative evaluation
each has of structures which inhibit this development. In both cases, the
manifestations of control over workers in workplace organizations represent
a major source of this blockage in the present society. Thus, both stress
the need for people to have genuine opportunities to satisfy their essen-
tial human needs through work, including their higher order needs.

It is precisely in this sense that alienation and QWL are seen to
offer a viable insight to the present research. Specifically, the use of
these concepts in the present research will focus on an assessment of the
extent to which the organizational structure of the institution being
examined affords these workers with the opportunity for the satisfaction of
various types of human needs. This will include the following: i) Basic
Needs - these are related to the provision of physical requirements and are
based in this case on such things as the pay received, the benefits provid-
ed, and the amount of security people perceive they have in their jobs.

ii) Social Needs - this refers to the extent to which the job provides
people the opportunity to engage in social intercourse, and receive the

mutual help and support of co-workers, etc. iii) Higher Order Needs -

100

these include the opportunity to use skills and abilities, to exercise
autonomy at work, to continue to learn and develOp, and to be treated as
responsible adults with dignity and respect.

Several implications follow from this interpretation. The meanings
which are attributed to the measures of need satisfaction in this particu-
lar application, require some clarification. Thus the thrust of the
investigation is on the perception that the employees in the study have of
the extent to which they can satisfy various needs at work. Need satisfac-
tion, is not seen as a static condition, which can be easily quantified and
whose existence is obvious to all. Nor is it the.case that once satisfied,
needs require no further attention. On the contrary, need satisfaction in
this conceptualization represents a constant and ongoing process which
theoretically never comes to an end but is rather, always in a state of
becoming.

An additional aspect about the way that need satisfaction is being
interpreted here needs to be considered. This relates to the meaning that
need satisfaction has for both the continued existence of alienation and
the extent of the quality of working life being experienced by the workers.
Specifically, how does the satisfaction of needs relate to both the amount
of alienation which is seen to exist and to the level of OWL being experi-
enced. The understanding of these concepts and their use in the present
investigation is such that they are not identified in quantitative or
absolute terms but rather reflect the relational qualities of the concepts.
Thus alienation is based on the nature of the existing relationships quite
apart from the expression of the alienated psychological states among the
actors involved. These are seen as one manifestation of the existence of

alienation along with other verbal and behavioural responses of these

101

workers. However, the implication of this is that alienation will be more
or less present depending on the Opportunity people have for satisfying
various needs at work.

In the same manner, QWL is seen as a "relational" entity based on the
particular social, historical and economic conditions which exist. The
relationship between QWL and need satisfaction is such that when the
opportunity for needs to be satisfied exists in the work organization,
there is a concomitant opportunity for people to experience a better
quality of working life. This should translate both verbally and behaviour-
ally into more positive responses to work on the part of the employees in
terms of their attitudes towards their jobs and the performance of their
duties. The converse of this would also apply.

A final point that needs to be considered with respect to the per-
ceptions that people have of their own work situations deals with the
particular way in which various individuals define objectively similar sets
of circumstances. This involves an enormously complex set of processes
which reflect the personal, social and institutional milieux within which
the individuals find themselves. Since people are reflexive and do not
respond automatically to the stimuli around them, the possibility exists
that people in the same situation will define it in completely different
ways. So too, the responses that they make to any given situation depend
to a large extent on their particular definition of it and their assessment
of what is either appropriate or possible given the existing circum-
stance.113

While this may reflect a general understanding of human behaviour,
several points are worthy of note. First, people make definite choices

about how to act or respond to given situations and these choices reflect

102

their concerns about and understanding of the situation. Second, they do

not make these choices in a vacuum. Their choices are limited by the

particular circumstances in which they find themselves. Thus Kanter notes,
"Life does not consist of infinite possibility because situations
do not make all responses equally plausible or equally available.
But the limits are not so much internal, rooted in the person, as
they are structured or situational."

The regularity we observe in patterns of social interaction, may be
due in part, to the structural limitations which individuals perceive to
exist. However, the constraints on human behaviour are seldom absolute and
in most cases there exists a range of behavioural alternatives. This makes
it possible for a number of individuals to choose different responses to

115 In the case of

what would appear to be similar structural situations.

Taylor's workers for example, some were actively cooperative while others

were extremely instrumental in their actions. Still others displayed

active resistance and hostility in the same situation. The particular

response that people make is ultimately an empirical question. It does

indicate, however, the pattern which the social relations take in a given

context. The types of responses exhibited by the workers who participated

in the present study are understood in precisely this manner.

VI.: Workers' Responses to Work.
"They had to throw away half a mile of Blackpool rock last year,
for instead of the customary motif running through its length, it
carried the terse injunction 'Fuck Off'...Our data include
examples of acts which only temporarily disconcert management,
and of those which have shut an entire factory. Sometimes the
behaviour involves only one person, but often the active or
passive cooperation of hundreds is observable. It may occur just
once or twice in the history of the indgsgry or be an almost
daily experience in the worker's life."

The types of responses which workers make to work range, as Taylor

noted, from workers giving the company their all, to looking for any excuse

103

to get out of work. The present research attempts to describe the particu-
lar strategies adopted by the Residential Counsellors in terms of both
their verbal and behavioural responses to work. The concepts of alienation
and QWL provide the context within which this behaviour will be examined.
Specifically, this will involve an assessment of the opportunities which
the staff perceives to exist at the Centre for the satisfaction of various
needs and the effects this has on their behaviour at work.

A major point of departure for the present study rests on the assump-
tion that people are not merely passive recipients of action but rather
play an active role in determining the nature of the social relations of
which they are part. Thus while a great deal of the literature on workers
depicts them as exploited, dominated and suffering inhuman working condi-
tions, very little focuses on the actions which workers take in response to
the situation which they encounter.

Similarly, much of the material which discusses work from a managerial
point of view, outlines the strategy adopted by management and generally
ignores the response made to it by the workers. One can find any number of
texts in this area which describe the progression from classical management
principles, to Taylorism and Fordism, to various applications of the Human
Relations approach, with very little said about the response that workers
made to this development.117

Recently, a number of excellent historical accounts of the develOpment
of the labour process have been introduced which do examine this from the

118 Many more are needed to widen our understanding

workers' point of view.
of this extremely important process. Even in this work, however, the types
of activities focussed on include mainly public expressions of workers

actions such as strikes or walkouts or more conventional organized

104

political activity. With the exception of a few ethnographies of workers
experiences at work, very little deals with the day-to-day reality which
workers encounter at the workplace.119 In fact, the little which does
exist is often criticized as being more 'journalistic' or 'pop' sociology
than real scientific research.

Several important points emerge from this discussion about workers
behaviour. First, workers are not simply victims but active participants
in the situations that they confront at work. Second, the managerial
perspective can be overwhelming since it represents the dominant ideology.
It can be so powerful that it gives the impression that it alone defines
the existing situation. However, as in the case of Scientific Management
described above, managerial initiatives are not always complete nor suc—
cessful and may often be themselves a reaction to the behaviour of workers!

A certain acceptability seems to accompany the passage of time making
it legitimate to describe the struggles which occurred in the history of
the labour process. Few studies, however, attempt to document the strug-
gles going on at present. If the labour process is indeed a process, and
if it hasn't ended but continues to exist, then there should be indications
of it which are visible today. Very few studies of this process exist.
Those that do, focus for the most part, on the experiences of blue collar
workers. Some attention has also been given to sales and clerical workers
in this regard. Professonal and technical workers however, have not
r'eceived a great deal of attention in the literature.

Perhaps this lack of attention is due to the perception that aliena-
tican is greatest among blue collar industrial workers and therefore they
3'13 the ones most suitable for study since the contradictions will be

grwaatest in their case. Whatever the reasons, the trends discussed above

105

with reference to the conditions which characterize the professional/-
technical occupations, warrants a careful consideration of their condi-
tions.

The orientation towards workers' behaviour which informs the present
analysis therefore is that people are constantly making choices about how
to act in any situation that they encounter. The range of response for a
given individual will depend on that person's perceptions of the situation
which includes considerations of factors both inherent in and external to
it. Thus, a worker may consider the state of the employment market in
formulating a particular strategy since the loss of one's job may be more
or less serious depending on the availability of alternative employment.

As Clawson suggested in the quote cited above, workers use a variety of

strategies and when one no longer works or becomes too costly, other

approaches may be taken. Similarly, Brecher and Costello note that,
“There are a number of ways that workers attempt to deal with the
power of their employers. We find it helpful to think of these
as alternative strategies. This does not mean that workers
always think out a conscious strategy. But even when these
strategies are largely a matter of habit, they are still ways of
acting to achieve a purpose in a context. Few individuals or
groups use any one of these strategies exclusiveéy; most workers
resort to most of them at one time or another."

This type of orientation to the behaviour of people in organizations
is discussed by Chambliss and Seidman as "dialectical institutionalism".121
In their conceptualization, these authors suggest that in order to under-
stand how organizations operate, the choices made by the occupants in the
various levels of the organization must be taken into account. They
further suggest that people interpret the policies and programmes of the

organization in terms of their own specific goals and interests and respond

on the basis of the structural limitations which each perceives to exist.

106

Chambliss and Seidman point out that it is erroneous to assume that
decisions which are made and implemented by those at the top of an orga-
nization are carried out in the manner expressed in the original instruc-
tions. They offer several examples of this including the apparent contradic-
tion found in university organizations regarding the implementation of
Title VII. While the law clearly states what the behaviour of the univer-
sities should be, little change has occurred in the actual employment of
women in many of these institutions. Chambliss and Seidman describe how
the particular choices made within the universities, and especially by
those with vested interests, can account for this situation.

Politicians are also keenly aware of this reality and often make
wholesale changes in the bureaucracies which they inherit when taking
office. The actions of entrenched bureaucrats inimical to the position of
the elected official in power, can be extremely harmful as reports get
accidentally misfiled, incomplete information is communicated and deadlines
are unavoidably missed!

Perrow makes a similar evaluation of the operation of organizations.
He discusses the existence of conflict in organizations in this light and
suggests that,

"Theory should see conflict as an inevitable part of organiza-
tional life stemming from organizational characteristics rather
than from the characteristics of individuals. Why are sales and
production in conflict in all firms - though to a greatly varying
degree? Or faculty and the administration in colleges, doctors
and nurses and administrators in hospitals, the treatment and
custodial staff in prisons?...One answer is obvious enough:

there is a never-ending struggle for values that are dear to the
participants - security, power, survival, discretion, and autono-
my - and a host of rewards. Because organizations do not consist
of people sharing the same goals, since the members bring with
them all sorts of needs and interests, and because control is far

from compigte, people will struggle for these kinds of
values."

107

The fact that people act in their own interests is not terribly
surprising. What is noteworthy in the formulations of both Chambliss and
Seidman and Perrow is that people make choices as incumbents of particular
positions in organizations which often are in conflict with and contradict
the overall goals of the organization. If Perrow is correct, conflict may
be a normal part of organizational life. Additionally, the relations
between labour and management presents an inherent source of conflict in
this system. We should expect to find, conflict, therefore, in any
organization that we examine. The problem is that conflict is usually
defined only in gross categories such as strikes or walkouts or other
public or dramatic forms of confrontation. The conflict which both
Chambliss and Seidman and Perrow describe in their models, is most often
covert, subtle and hidden from view!

There are several ways in which this occurs. Gouldner, for example,
documented a case in which employees of a gypsum factory routinely appro-

priated tools and materials for their own personal use.123

The people
working at the plant defined this as completely acceptable behaviour. In
another example, executives convicted in the "great electrical conspiracy"
case reported that their obviously illegal behaviour had become so normal
and routine that it had become defined as a standard operating procedure
despite the fact that all the employees understood it to be illegal.124
Perhaps a more typical example involves the blatant way in which

administrative memo's and directives are ignored in many organizations.
The pattern usually consists of the ritualistic observance of a new set of
orders and procedures during the period immediately following their issu-

ance. Shortly thereafter, however, the organizational routine goes back to

the way it was before the new procedures were put in place and they are

108

slowly rendered useless. This is especially apparent in workplaces which
require safety equipment such as eyeglasses, hardhats or ear protection to
be worn. This paraphenalia is usually kept nearby in case someone from
outside the area should happen to come to investigate. But as a matter of
practice, the equipment is routinely ignored. Perrow is quite right when
he notes that control is never complete and that people will struggle to
adhere to their own values!

Faber has described a number of strategies that workers sometimes
adopt in response to the conditions they encounter at work.125 His
typology includes the following categories:

i) Humanizing the workplace - this includes activities which make
the work more bearable and the worktime pass more quickly for the
workers. This includes such things as daydreaming, socializing,
playing games, etc.

ii) Restructuring the work relations - this includes a deliberate
attempt on the part of the employees to challenge management's
right to establish the organization of work and includes such
things as 'soldiering', mutual aid among the employees, re-
structuring jobs, ignoring established work routines, etc.

iii) War on the shopfloor - this category includes those actions which
workers take in defiance of management's control and authority.
These are provocative and hostile responses differing from i) and
ii) above in both quality and degree. This would include such
actions as blatant insubordination, sabotage, vandalism, strikes,
sitdowns, walkouts, etc.

iv) The war within the worker - Faber included this category to
reflect the internal struggle which alienation often promotes
within individual workers, for regardless of how alienated people
are, they can never be completely separated from their own
activity. In some instances, they choose to express their
skills, abilities and initiative beyond management's view. This
often takes the form of designing labour saving devices or
redesigning jobs to take advantage of shortcuts discovered
through the familiarity acquired in the actual performance of the
job. The war within the worker describes the worker's inability
to utilize their skills and abilities to the fullest.

Each of these categories will be considered briefly below.

i) Humanizing The Workplace.

109

The conditions of modern work for most people consist of dull, monoto-
nous, repetitive tasks. Even in the white collar workforce, there is
little opportunity to experience challenging or interesting work. Since
most of the heavy work today is done by machines, the struggle more often
than not is against the clock, a feature that workers often find most
demanding about their jobs. In speaking of this type of time, of time as
"duree", Daniel Bell notes,

"There are psychological modes which encompass the differing
perceptions: the dull moments and the swift moments, the bleak
moments and the moments of bliss, the agony of time prolonged and
of time eclipsed, of time recalled and of time anticipated - in
short, time not as a chronologicallggnction of space, but time
felt as a function of experience."

In order to escape from or relieve the monotomy of the "metric"
measurement of time, workers create various strategies. Donald Roy, for
example, describes how workers informally broke up the workday into differ-
ent "times" which would interrupt the normal routine and given the workers
a chance to interact with each other, to stimulate enough interest and
thought to get them through to the next "time".127

The onerous quality of time as duree is a constant element of a
workprocess in which the individual worker does not have control over the
work itself. In this type of situation, even little games such as switch-
ing the order in which tasks are performed or working on different se-
quences of the task can help the time go faster. While these are trivial
examples of how some people deal with the monotony of work, Watson de-
scribes several much more dramatic techniques including "horseplay".128

Watson reports that a water fight took place in an automobile factory

on a hot summer day, and what started out as a few men squirting each other

turned into a standing hose fight in the "hot test" section of the motor

110

department. He stated that the fight lasted for several days and many of
the men took to wearing bathing caps and raincoats to work!
"The fight usually involved about ten or fifteen hoses, each with
the water pressure of a fire hose. With streams of cross-fire,
shouting, laughing and running about, there was hardly a man in
the mood for doing his job. The shop was regularly1g§enched from
ceiling to floor with every man completely soaked."
Needless to say, this type of behaviour was strictly forbidden by the
company!

These are a few examples of the way that some workers attempt to
humanize their jobs. While many more examples could have been cited, these
provide an adequate sample of the range of behaviour included in this
category. The specific strategies adopted by workers in this regard will
usually depend on the particular circumstances which people find on their
jobs.

ii) Restructuring The Work Relations

The restriction of output known as 'soldiering' has already been
described above. This is one method workers use to restructure the work
relations. Another example which is typical of this strategy involves
workers helping each other, or restructuring tasks in ways which are
prohibited by management. In this context, Faber describes as situation in
which a number of workers get together to "carry" a fellow worker when
there has been a death in the family, or the worker is ill and cannot

130

"carry" his or her own job. The other workers will actually do part or

all of the other persons job for a while.
In another example of mutual aid, a worker described the following:

"Once in a while a fellow will get behind who ordinarily is a
good worker. That sometimes happens to anyone. I know a fellow
down there who did that and two other fellows went over and
started helping him out...I think it's a good idea to help a
fellow out once in a while. It makes all the difference in the
world. It's a funny thing, I'll be working along and be behind,

111

and I'll feel all fagged out. Then someone comes over and starts
in wiring on my equipment with me, and you know I perk up to beat
the band. I don't know; it just seems to put new life into you,
no matter if he only helps you for a couple of levels. .1 can31
pick up and work like the deuce then, uptill qUitting time."

Another strategy which workers use to restructure the workplace is
known as "splitting" work or "doubling up". This practice involves two or
more workers agreeing to work each other's jobs for a specified period of
time, such that one person does both jobs for the interval while the other
has "free" time and then they alternate. This eliminates the need for both
to work continuously but requires each of them to work twice as hard when
they are working. The free time gained by doing this is apparently worth
the effort expended!

In discussing "doubling up" Watson writes that, "There is planning and
counter-planning in the plant because there is clearly a situation of dual
power."132 He describes a number of extremely intricate operations that
workers undertake to circumvent management's authority including such
things as instituting alternative plans for carrying out the work by the
workers; switching men and jobs throughout the plant so that friends might
work together; and rearranging break times.

Each of these examples demonstrates how the social structure at work
involves a dynamic process of interaction incorporating both the workers
and management. It would be incorrect therefore to think that the orga-
nization of the workplace rests simply on the implementation of manage-
ment's directives. The workplace represents an arena in which the inter-
action between workers and management takes place with each side both
acting and reacting to the other. It is in this context that the notion of

'choice' described above is also quite evident. People choose to follow

rules, to ignore them or to create others. The existence of management's

112

operational handbook is no guarantee that the proscriptions contained
therein will be followed.

While management exercises superior power in most instances, the
ability of workers to affect the organization's goals, policies and program-
mes cannot be neglected. Watson has quite correctly called this a situa-
tion of dual power and it should be understood as such. This is the
essence of workers' acting to restructure the workplace and it reflects the
extent of the power that they have.

iii) War On The Sh0pfloor.

As we noted above, war on the shop floor includes those types of
behaviour which seriously challenge managerial authority. They differ from
the behaviours considered under i) and ii) in both quality and degree and
in most cases, a great deal of hostility is involved. These acts, in fact,
could result in the laying of serious criminal charges if the perpretrators
were apprehended. The type of behaviour which falls under this category
includes such things as sabotage, wildcat strikes, vandalism, sit downs,
etc.

"But most workers, by and large, are not so articulate about
their work. Their behaviour itself is a judgement...These take
the form of crazy racings against the clock to vary the deadly
monotony, of slowdowns - the silent war against production
standards - and most spectacularly in the violent eruptions of
wildcat strikes against "speeggups," i.e., changes in the time
required to complete a job."

The spontaneity and determination shown by workers in wildcat strikes
demonstrates the lengths to which they are willing to go to have their
demands met. Thousands of dollars in lost production are the consequence

of such action and the leaders of wildcat strikes know that their jobs may

be at stake.

113

Sabotage is another form that the war on the shop floor takes. In a
production system which utilizes moving assembly lines or conveyor belts, a
well placed bolt or wrench brings the operation to a crashing halt, often
to the cheers of the people working there. The result is that the workers
get a few moments rest while the line is being repaired. Taylor and Walton
offer the following examples.

"In the Christmas rush in a Knightsbridge store, the machine
which shuttled change backwards and forwards suddenly ground to a
halt. A frustrated salesman had demobilized it by ramming a
cream bun down its gullet. In our researches we have been told
by Woolworth's sales girls how they clank half a dozen buttons on
the till simultaneously to win a few minutes' rest from 'ringing
up'. Railwaymen have described how they block lines with trucks
to delay shunting Operations for a few hours. Materials are
hidden in factories, conveyor belts jammed with sticks, cogs
stopped with wire and ropes, lorries 'accidentally' backed into
ditches. Electricians labour to put in weak fuses, textile
workers 'knife' through carpets and farm workers Eggperate to
choke agricultural machinery with tree branches."

In some cases, the 'breakdowns' are organized to take place throughout
the day at various places in the organization. This avoids casting suspi-
cion on any one worker but it is quite difficult to do. Watson describes
one such situation in which fifty men counted off numbers to take their

135 He describes this as a

turns in this type of organized sabotage!
serious threat to management and a challenge to their authority. He
reports that workers in the particular engine plant in which this took
place, were extremely upset about the quality of a new engine that the
company had introduced. The engineering and testing of the engine had been
rushed and as a result, the product was of particularly poor quality. When
the men discovered this, they reported the problem to their foreman but
were ordered to keep working. When neither the plant management nor the

union would do anything to resolve the situation the workers took matters

into their own hands. With an incredible amount of plantwide coordination

114

and planning, the workers were able to bring production of the engine in
question to a complete halt. After a number of failed attempts to get
production going again, management was forced to reconsider its plans. It
discontinued production of the new motor and returned to production of the
older, more reliable engine!

While most cases of sabotage and vandalism are individual in nature,
the examples presented above demonstrate that this is not always the case.
The significance of this type of behaviour is that it represents more than
simply one worker taking out his or her frustrations with the job, on the
equipment or products. It is, in essence, a challenge to management's
control over the work process. Workers have a direct impact on both the
quantity and quality of their output. In addition, they are able to
influence what goes on in many other areas of the organization. This
behaviour forms a major part of the interaction which underscores the
control which is exercised by management over the labour process. It also
reflects the nature of conflict which exists in the workplace.

iv) The War Within The Worker.

This category consists of those actions which workers engage in, in
their efforts to counteract the stultifying conditions which they encounter
at work. The narrow duties and tasks of most jobs provide little outlet
for the expression of individual skills and ability. Moreover, decisions
concerning how jobs are to be done are usually made by engineers in the
company's planning department or by some other management official, leaving
little room for individual initiative on the part of the workers.

Several consequences of this situation are found in the way that
people express themselves at work. In spite of the restrictions placed on

them by management, workers often 'individualize' their workstations or

115

tools. Additionally, they may create labour saving devices or processes
and constantly devise more efficient ways of doing their jobs. These are
hidden from management however, both because they are illegal and because
they might be used against them by management in order to get more output.
Both Faber and Roy describe a tactic known as "making out" in which
workers work at break neck speeds in order to get their production quotas

136 Not only does this free up some time for

out as quickly as possible.
the workers but it also serves to demonstrate to both workers and the
foremen what they "can do". This form of self expression is one way that
workers use to test their abilities at work. As Faber notes, "This inci-
dent (a case of "making out") in addition to illustrating "the testing"
process, shows the comaradery and solidarity that arises among workers
which has as one of its consequences, invading management's right to plan
and manage work."137

The war within the worker relates directly to the importance attached
to human activity in both the concept of alienation and QWL described
above. Human development, in this conceptualization requires the exercise
of human powers and abilities in the satisfaction of human needs which in
turn results in the development of new powers and new needs. The con-
ditions of modern work stifle this form of growth and development to the
extent that workers are prohibited from using their powers at work. The
war within the worker is only another expression of the workers' struggle
to overcome alienation and to enhance the quality of life they experience
at work.

The four categories described above represent a number of strategies

in which workers engage in response to the situations they encounter at

work. The selection of any one or all of these strategies does not imply

116

that they represent the typical response of the particular worker or group
of workers who chose them. They may be daily occurrences or isolated
events. The purpose of the typology is to describe the types of actions
that people take at work. These categories represent various types of
responses to conditions which adversely affect the quality of their working
lives. Its usefulness lies in its identification of the worker as an
active participant in the labour process. In addition, it sensitizes us to
the types of behaviours which do in fact occur.

Most of the examples presented above refer specifically to blue
collar, industrial occupations and primarily to the prototypical industrial
worker, i.e., the one who works on an automobile assembly line. One of the
goals of the present research is to find out if the behavioural strategies
adopted by these assembly line workers are similar to those adopted by
professional/technical workers. Studies of clerical workers indicate that
many of these behavioural categories do apply but reflect the specific
conditions of their work. As we noted earlier, the type of control experi-
enced by clerical workers approximates that of the assembly line worker
much more so than it does that of the Residential Counsellors. The control
of these workers incorporates "unobtrusive" elements more often found among
professional occupations. The present research will allow an examination
of the effectiveness of these types of control on these lower level profes-
sional/technical employees.

A number of questions were included in this project which focussed
specifically on the types of behaviour outlined in this typology. Ques-
tions dealing with these responses were incorporated in the interview
portion of this research project and included both open ended and forced

choice type of questions. These were designed to assess the nature of the

117

responses which exist at the Centre; the degree of seriousness the workers
themselves attach to the various types of behaviour reported; and the
frequency of the various responses in question. In addition, a self-filled
questionnaire was administered to these respondents which included a number
of self-reported behaviour items. This was seen as preferable and poten-
tially more viable than including these rather sensitive questions about
serious personal behaviour in the body of the interview.

The questions included in this part of the research instrument were
drawn from items developed by Faber which were outlined above. These had
been used successfully before by Caputo in a study of high school students,

138 They are based on the

and by Gardiner in a study of postal workers.
types of actions which workers sometimes take in their attempts to
"humanize" the workplace and reflect the inherent contradictions which
exist there. This behaviour demonstrates the alienation of these workers
in the lack of control that they have over their work. They often repre-
sent an attempt by these workers to assert themselves at work, to exercise
some control over the workplace and to express themselves through their
actions at work. They are concerned with what happens at work and both act
and react to the situation that exists there.

For some workers however, work has no meaning or importance, save for
othe purely instrumental concerns of a pay check. Faunce suggests that it
may be these workers who are the most alienated in the sense that they are
satisfied with low quality jobs, which afford them little opportunity to
grow or develop or to use their skills and abilities. These people have
withdrawn their commitment from work and invest little of themselves in
their jobs. They seek neither their identities nor their self worth in

their jobs.139

118

Faunce discusses alienation as self-estrangement in this regard and
points out that,

"Alienation means the opposite of commitment or identification as
defined above. Alienation refers to a disjuncture between
self-esteem maintenance and status-assignment processes. We are
alienated from others or from any organization in which we are
members to the extent that the criteria we use to evaluate
ourselves are difiéerent from the criteria used by others in
evaluating us."

He notes that occupational achievement is considered an important
source of self evaluation among middle class Americans but suggests that
this need not be the case. Social status, according to Faunce, has a
multidimensional character and people may choose non-work roles and
achievements as the basis for their social status and self esteem evalua-
tions. Thus, people are more likely to use those values that account for
the high status experiences that they have, when they evaluate themselves.
Conversely, they are likely to invest little of themselves in situations
which have no direct relationship to how they think of themselves. It
should not be surprising therefore, to find that people invest little of
themselves in work situations where few opportunities exist for positive
evaluations.

The processes of status assignment and self-esteem maintenance in-
cludes more than simply the evaluations that a person makes of him or
herself. A “self-concept" is something that is acquired in our relations
with others and reflects their reactions to us. According to Faunce, when
these "reactions" or evaluations of us are infrequent or unimportant i.e.,
we do not evaluate ourselves on the same basis, we can accept a low evalua-

tion and status with impunity. However, when we are evaluated by people

with whom we are in frequent contact, it is much more difficult to avoid a

119

self evaluation on this basis even if we define the criteria used in this
evaluation as unimportant.

Faunce focuses on the process of status assignment and self-esteem
maintenance which occurs in the workplace. He discusses the various
factors which affect this process and the relationship these have to worker
alienation. He notes the importance of being evaluated by persons of
higher or lower status in the process of self evaluation and suggests that
it is difficult to avoid a self evaluation based on the work role when the
work role places a person in regular contact with people at higher status
levels. However, the pattern of this behaviour for lower level clerical
workers, as well as for unskilled or semi-skilled machine operators, is one
which reflects relatively "low interpositional status, meaningless intrapo-
sitional status distinctions, limited possibilities for upward mobility and
the restriction of work associates to persons at the same status level."

He goes on to suggest the following,
"Of course, not all persons in these occupations are alienated
from work. Young people are, in particular, more likely to have
a mobility orientation than to be alienated. The studies re-
ferred to above, however, suggest that a substantial proportion
of the people in these jobs see their work as an instrumental
activity, do not evaluate themselves in terms of work-related
activities, and are therefore alienated from work in the sense in
which we are using the term ..."

This "instrumental" orientation to work is widespread in the work-
force. Taylor noted that the majority of the workers he was observing did
what was really required of them but no more. Faunce conservatively
estimates that at least half of the American labour force is alienated to
some extent according to this usage of the term. The question for the

present study is how this use of the term relates to the one described

above.

120

In our discussion, we noted the importance and meaning that is at-
tached to work in this society. The definition of alienation subsequently
developed was based, for the most part, on the role that human activity as
work plays in the process of self development and growth. Alienation was
then described as a situation in which individuals exercise little or no
control over the purpose, process or products of their work. Faunce
approaches the same process but from a different perspective. He recogniz-
es the importance that exercising control over work has for self-fulfill-
ment but points out that work is not the only factor that people use in
their self evaluations and while it may be significant for some people, it
is not entirely clear that this is universally so. He points to studies
conducted by Dubin, Ozark, Lyman and Wilensky in this context which show

142 For

that a wide variation exists in the way that people evaluate work.
some it is extremely important but for others it has ceased to be a central
life interest! In particular, these studies indicate that this is espe-
cially true among people in lower status occupations. "One response to the
inability to confirm a favourable self-image at work is to evaluate one's

self exclusively in non-work related values."143

Hence, the instrumental
response to work described above. He notes that,
"Although alienation, or a withdrawal of concern with achieve-
ment, is not the only response to low status, it is a iammon one
and is likely to be more stable than other responses."

The particular manifestation of alienation described by Faunce is
included in the present study as an indicator of the extent to which people
identify with or are committed to their jobs. This is consistent with the
definition of alienation described above in the sense that work shggld
afford people an opportunity to develop and maintain a positive self-image.

In fact, a person's work should be the main vehicle for this process. If

121

this does not occur, and people withdraw their investments of self from
their work roles, then they are alienated in a substantial portion of their
lives especially since work occupies more than half of the waking hours of
most people. In this sense, work does not contribute to their growth and
development as human beings but merely provides the means for staying
alive. Faunce notes that it is precisely those people who are satisfied
with low status jobs that are the most alienated. People who are dissat-
isfied or reject low status jobs obviously continue to value their work
roles and are seeking ways to improve their situations.

Two scales were included in this study in order to measure the extent
of people's self investment in work. The first consists of the standard
short form of the Lodahl and Kejner "Job Involvement Scale", and the second
is based on the measure of intrinsic motivation developed by Lawler and

Haii.145

The Lodahl and Kejner scale was used in order to permit compari-
sons with a number of similar studies in this area, although its interpre-
tation is somewhat problematic.

It is not entirely clear how the Lodahl and Kejner scale defines the
meaning of job involvement since a number of different meanings are alluded
to by these authors. Lawler and Hall point out for example, that Lodahl
and Kejner report two distinct definitions of job involvement in their
article, one based on "the degree to which a person is identified psycho-
logically with his work, or the importance of work in his total self-
image," and the other based on "the degree to which a person's work perfor-
mance affects his self-esteem."146

Lawler and Hall go on to argue that these two definitions are quite

distinct. Lawler, for example, has identified intrinsic motivation as,

"the degree to which a job holder is motivated to perform well because of

122

some subjective rewards or feelings that he expects to receive or experi-

"147 In this construct, esteem and feel-

ence as a result of performance.
ings of growth are tied directly to performance. They suggest that in
order to clarify the problems of definition which exist, it would be best
to accept Lodahl and Kejner's first definition - the degree of psychologi-
cal identification with one's work - as the definition of job involvement
and to accept Lawler's definition of intrinsic motivation.148
A further clarification of this is offered by M.M. Moch who points out
that Lodahl-Kejner actually identify three relatively stable components of

149 Moch indicates however, that none of

job involvement in their article.
these reflects the extent to which an employee is involved in the orga-
nization in which he or she works. He discusses this in the sense that it
is possible for persons to identify with the organization in which they
work and yet not be involved in their job and vice versa. Organizational
involvement here refers to the degree to which employees take their iden-
tities from their organizations while job involvement is concerned with the
degree to which employees take their identities from their jobs. Although
the distinction is a subtle one it is important. He goes on to examine the
effects of social integration and isolation on job involvement, orga-
nizational involvement and intrinsic motivation.

The important point in Moch's discussion, for our purposes, centres on
the question of whether these job attitudes, that is, both job involvement
and intrinsic motivation, are brought to the workplace by the individual
employees or whether they arise as a consequence of the characteristics of
the workplace itself. Some inconsistency exists here since, on the one
hand, Lodahl and Kejner suggest that job characteristics such as meaningful-

ness of work, adequacy of supervision and social nearness to others at

123

work, etc. might affect job involvement. On the other hand, in their
summary of research on job involvement, they conclude that it is relatively
stable over time representing long established psychological response to
work and is unaffected by changes in work organization.150

In the present research, the Lodahl-Kejner scale is understood as an
inferential measure of investment in work such that both the personal and
job characteristics are seen to be contributing factors in a person's
involvement in work. The interpretation of intrinsic motivation is much
less problematic since the relationship between performance and self-evalua-
tion is quite clear in this case. Thus both scales will be used as indica-
tors of the extent to which a person is committed or identifies with his or
her job. Lack of commitment in either case is related to the existence of
alienation.

A number of items were included in this study which measure the extent
to which the employees cooperate at work. We sought to differentiate here
between indications of the overall effort that the employees made while at
work; their positive contributions to the achievement of organizational
goals; and the type of behaviour which is unsolicited or required of the
employee and which goes above and beyond the call of duty. It was felt
that those employees who frequently engaged in this type of behaviour,
identified work as a source of self esteem and a means for satisfying many
of their needs, especially their higher order needs. This type of behav-
iour should also be accompanied by higher levels of commitment to and
identification with their jobs on the part of these workers.

In our discussion of self evaluation above, the importance of the
evaluations of co-workers and supervisors was briefly mentioned. In

addition, the effect that mobility orientation has on the process of self

124

evaluation was referred to especially with respect to young workers. A
number of measures of both of these factors are included in this study and
these reflect the formulations described above. The frequency and criteria
used in the formal evaluation process at the Centre, for example, or the
perceptions of the RC staff of their opportunities for advancement, are two
such measures.

Finally, a standard set of demographic items was used in this research
including such variables as age; sex; marital status; father's occupation
and education; and mother's occupation and education. These will be

discussed at greater length in the data analysis below.

VII. Summary

The purpose of this research is to describe the way that this particu-
lar group of workers, the Residential Counsellors, respond to and make
sense of their work experiences. The patterns which are discernable in
both their verbal and behavioural responses to work and the strategies that
they develop in this regard, form the major concern of the current inves-
tigation. Various types of strategies which have been used by blue collar
industrial workers were discussed above and an attempt will be made to
compare these responses to those of the RC's being studied here. While
many of these strategies involve behaviour which is inimical to manage-
ment's interests, some attention will also be given to workers' behaviour
which reflects an instrumental as well as a positive response to work.

Indications of the degree of Job Involvement and Intrinsic Motivation
form another dimension of the current study. These seek to determine the

level of commitment that people have to work. Both of these factors were

125

related to the status assignment and self-esteem maintenance processes
which operate in the workplace. A number of questions concerning the
evaluation process at the Centre for the RC's were included in the present
study and will be discussed at length below. These types of variables seek
to provide some indication of the extent to which these workers are able to
establish and maintain positive self images through their jobs. This is
extremely important given our emphasis on work as a major locus for experi-
encing human development and self-actualization. This is seen in terms of
both alienation and the quality of working life.

Finally, this entire project is underscored by the concepts of aliena-
tion and QWL. The manner in which these concepts are being used here, is
based on the importance that each attaches to the process of self develop-
ment and growth experienced in the free and spontaneous expression of human
activity. The meaning that this has in the present context depends upon
the nature of the control over their activity that people experience at
work. What is required for reducing alienation and enhancing QWL is the
creation of work organizations in which people have the opportunity to
satisfy their human needs. This includes basic, social and higher order
needs and contains some of the following characteristics: the opportunity
for workers to use and develop skills and abilities; the opportunity for
workers to exercise control over the work process and to take part in the
important decisions affecting their worklives; for workers to be treated
with dignity and respect at work; and to have interesting, challenging and
satisfying jobs. An assessment of the extent to which the organization of
work at the Centre affords the RC's these types of opportunities forms

another major aspect of the current research.

126

Neither alienation nor QWL is understood in the present context in an
'objectified', static manner. Instead, they are both seen to be based on
the existence of particular types of relations at work. Thus, alienation
and QWL are not 'things' whose existence can be verified and measured once
and for all as one would measure the height of a mountain or the distance
between two cities, etc. On the contrary, alienation and QWL are concepts
which describe the characteristics that certain forms of interaction and
specifically work in this instance, take under given social and historical
circumstances. They reflect the dynamic interaction which is constantly
renewed in the daily recreation of the existing social structure. Thus,
for example, alienation is never total nor complete and its very existence
implies the concommitant existence of activity aimed at its elimination.

This research seeks more to describe than to explain the manner in
which a particular group of employees make sense of their working lives.

It attempts to outline the various responses which these workers make to
the structures they encounter in their daily experiences at work. It tries
to understand how various aspects of this structure influence the choices
they make. Finally, it seeks to compare the experiences of these particu-
lar workers with those of workers in both more traditional occupations and
those whose work roles reflect the trends of the jobs of the future in this

society.

127

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

 

I. The Research Site.

This is a study of the direct care staff of a large facility for the
developmentally handicapped. The facility, known as the Centre, was built
in 1961 and houses approximately 622 individuals, most of whom are adults
above the age of 18. Many of the clients have been at the Centre for a
number of years and some since its opening. Although the general percep-
tion of the client population is that they are severely and profoundly
retarded, in actual fact, the clients present a number of disabilities
including: deafness, blindness, physical handicaps, sensory handicaps,
speech impairments, deafness, maladaptive behaviours and various ranges of
retardation based on 1.0. testing.

The Centre is located in a prosperous agricultural region which
borders several major population centres. It provides service for a
catchment area of approximately two and a quarter million people and forms
part of a larger government run system which includes a number of such
facilities. Most of the people who work at the Centre are from the sur-
rounding area, however, its proximity to major urban centres insures that a
pool of the necessary professional staff is readily available and can be
recruited by the Centre.

The facility operates numerous programmes that specialize in dealing
with the needs and requirements of its clients. Toward this end, the

Centre maintains a fully staffed medical unit; a psychology department;

128

educational and vocational training units with various facilities including
a woodworking shop and a operational farm and garden programme; a Speech
and Language department; a Dietary department; and a Community services
department among others. In general, the Centre is a self-contained
facility which has all the necessary resources to fully meet the needs Of
its residents.

The Centre employs a staff of approximately 825 which includes both
professional and non—professional employees. Many of these people are
involved in providing support services to the various programme depart-
ments. The Centre, for example, operates its own power plant, has a
maintenance staff which is responsible for the Operation of the physical
plant, a housekeeping staff, a laundry, and dietary staff, in addition to
the people involved in the medical or residential programmes described
above. The single largest group of employees at the Centre however, is the
Residential Counselling staff, the RC's. These are the people who work
directly with the residents and provide for their individual needs.

The Centre is comprised of a series of buildings or “pavillions” which
are linked by connecting hallways or tunnels. These buildings contain the
various departments of the Centre as well as a series Of residential units
in which the clients are housed. These are described at the Centre as
follows:

i) > East Unit, which contains nine subunits or "residences", ii) West Unit
which contains seven residences, iii) Nursing/Developmental Unit which
contains eight residences, iv) Special Units which contain three residences
which are specifically designed for hearing or vision impaired residents,
and a v)Behaviour Modification Unit which deals with residents who present

special problems or are self-injurious. For the purposes of the present

129

research, the Special Units and the Behavioural Modification Unit were
considered as one unit since they are both under the direction of the
Psychology department and they have a number of characteristics in common
which make them substantially different from the other residential units.
These will be described in greater detail below.

While this intraorganizational classification identifies the different
residences, there is little to distinguish them in their physical appear-
ance. The different units (with the exception of Special/Behavioural
Modification Unit) are all quite similar in their appointments. They each
occupy two floors of a particular pavillion, with each of the subunits or
residences leading Off from a main corridor. When walking through the
hallways in any of the pavillions, one gets the impression that there are
only individual rooms adjacent to the main corridor, when in actuality,
each of the residences extends outward for over one hundred feet. Within
each residence are the eating, sleeping, recreational and lavatory facil-
ities for the people living there.

Each of the Units is under the direction of a Residence Supervisor who
is responsible for the staff and the programmes in his or her area. In
addition, each unit is populated by different types of clients, which
results in a variety of treatment and handling requirements for the differ-
ent Units. These differences give each of the Units a unique character.
These will be described below and a discussion of the implications of these
differences for the present research will be presented.

The West Unit of the Centre occupies the entire West Pavillion of the
Centre and contains seven residential subunits in addition to the three
Special Units residences. The residences which are located on the first

and second floor of this pavillion house and serve the develOpmental and

130

recreational needs of over two hundred adults. The West Unit provides
residential services to its clients, such as direct care, treatment and
training for both long and short term periods of admission as well as
respite care.

The residences on the first floor of the West Unit provide services to
approximately twenty severely or profoundly handicapped women. Immediate
training needs of these clients include basic life skills or independent
functioning such as dressing, eating and toilet skills. The units on the
second floor Of this section provide services to twenty men whose needs are
similar to those of the women described above. Clients in the other four
residences on the second floor are more independent in self-care skills and
their immediate training needs include vocational or pre-vocational program-
mes and community orientation skills such as care of clothing and personal
grooming or hygiene. Most of these clients are employed full-time in the
facility through the Department of Vocational Services. This includes
approximately forty men and seventy five women.

The East Unit is composed Of nine residences, two housing female and
seven housing male clients. While this Unit is similar to the West Unit in
many respects, it differs in that many of the residents here are severely
and profoundly retarded. All residents in this classification require
close and constant supervision. The exceptions to this in East Unit
include one residence that houses children and young adults, with intelli-
gence levels ranging from moderate to profoundly retarded and one residence
for women from six to twenty-five years of age with mental capabilities
also in the moderate to profoundly retarded range.

One of the major differences between East and West Units is the level

of functioning of their respective clients. While several of the

131

residences on East Unit are quite similar to their counterparts in West
Unit, one in particular houses twenty three severely and profoundly retard-
ed active, adult males. The functioning level Of these individuals is
probably the lowest of all residents at the facility and this necessitates
a great deal of individual attention in all the basic life skills program-
mes undertaken in the area. This is perhaps one of the more difficult
areas in the Centre to work in.

In addition, East Unit contains most Of the adult male residents who
work full time in the various shops at the Centre as well as on the farm
facility. These residents are referred to by the staff as the "big boys"
or "working boys" since most are full grown adults. These residents can
prove difficult to handle on occasion by virtue of their physical size and
strength. While male Residential Counsellors are prohibited from working
in female residences, no such restriction exists for women RC's working in
male residences. Occasionally, a small female RC is required to work with
several large, strong, male residents. Several members of the RC staff
indicated that this could prove particularly difficult at times.

The Nursing/Developmental Unit is located in the medical wing Of the
facility and is comprised of eight residences serving 160 clients. The
Infirmary, which is one of these residences, is specifically designed to
care for acutely ill clients from all Units of the facility. In addition
three of the residences in this section house residents who are severely
handicapped and who require a great deal of nursing care to meet their
individual needs. The remaining residences in this section house multi-
handicapped, developmentally delayed residents, but these residents do have

the potential to participate in Off-residence activities such as school,

132

workshops, pre-vocational programmes, Blissymbolics,1 as well as various
skill building programmes.

Twenty-six full-time and seven part-time nurses are on staff in this
Unit with each residence having a Registered Nurse as a Supervisor in
addition to twelve to fifteen qualified Residential Counsellors. Approxi-
mately one hundred Residential Counsellors are assigned to the Nursing/-
Developmental Unit.

The final two Units include Special Units and the Behaviour Modifica-
tion Unit which are both under the direction of the Psychology Department.
The Special Units house residents with sensory impairments including one
for the hearing imparied, one for the visually impaired and one for persons
both hearing and visually impareid. The Behaviour Modification Unit (8.
Mod.) accepts those clients who require intensive assistance, for example,
those who are self-injurious.

The residents of these Units are comprised of clients who require
highly specialized, intensive, and comprehensive services from highly
trained Residential Counsellors and other professionals. This includes
vocational, medical, psychological, recreational and educational personnel.
The services provided in this Unit consist of self-care, skill building,
behaviour management as well as the teaching job related skills. The
Special Units are, therefore, a place in the facility where clients with
special needs can receive the concentrated services of a host of profes-
sional staff members.

There are several features which make the Special/B.Mod. Unit quite
different from the other Units in the Centre. In terms of physical appear-
ance alone, the Special Units differ in a number of ways. For example,

they are more richly appointed, including carpeted floors and finer

133

furnishings. They incorporate kitchen facilities, a recreational patio, a
dining room and personalized sleeping areas which affords the residents in
these Units a greater degree of privacy than that found in the other Units.

The other major difference between the Special/B.Mod. Unit and the
other Units in the Centre is the low staff to resident ratio. For example,
the Behaviour Modification Unit contains ten beds and has a staff of
fifteen (including the Supervisor and Director). The other Special Units
each house approximately fifteen residents and have a staff of fifteen.
This is a much higher ratio than that found in any of the other non-medical
residences. In the other residences, twelve to fifteen RC's are usually
responsible for up to forty residents, depending on their level of func-
tioning.

A final difference between the Special/B.Mod. Units and the other
residential units of the Centre is the apparent prestige and status which
the RC's attach to working in them. These are fairly new, experimental
programme Units in the Centre and the staff selected for service in them
was supposed to be the most highly trained and experienced among the RC's.
Additionally, these Units provide the staff who work in them an opportunity
to work very closely with a small number of clients and to apply the skills
and training that they have acquired.

The implications that the differences that exist between these four
Units have for the present research is based on a consideration of the way
that each unit is organized and run as well as on the type of clients that
each unit provides service to. The relatively low staff to client ratio's
in the Special/B.Mod. Unit for example, provides the RC's working there
with a different type of work experience compared to that of those workers

in areas with higher staff to client ratio's.

134

An additional factor to be considered is the functioning level Of the
clients. The lower the functioning level Of the clients, the more diffi-
cult it is to get intrinsic rewards from work. With higher functioning
clients, progress in a skill building programme for example, is not only
possible but visible. These clients can also express themselves to the
RC's and this is another source of satisfaction and gratification for those
working with them. When working with low functioning clients on the other
hand, intrinsic sources of reward are less available and the RC staff
member in this situation must rely more on external rewards and on those
received from co-workers for satisfaction.

Another way in which the Units differ, which is important in the
present context, is in the amount of control workers in each of these units
exercise over their jobs. This is at least partially related to the type
of work done in each Of the Units. The Nursing staff in the Nursing/-
Developmental Units for example, exercise more authority in their profes-
sional capacities than do many of the RC's in the other Units. Similarly,
the staff in the Special/B.Mod. Unit is able to work much more independent
of supervision than the staff in the other residential units. These
differences should be important in the present research considering the
framework outlined above.

Finally, it is important to point out the constant interaction at the
Centre between the various Departments in the facility. The residents that
any particular Residential Counsellor is responsible for may be subject to
or involved in a whole array of programmes. The RC's therefore, are
continually in contact with professionals from various departments through—
out the Centre, including the medical staff, Psychologists, Speech Thera-

pists, Physiotherapists, Occupational Therapists, Vocational Counsellors,

135

etc., etc. This again is important considering the formulation presented
above.

The Residential Counsellors are the pivotal group of employees in the
Centre since they are the ones who provide the care and services to the
residents of the facility. While they are responsible for the residents,
they actually make few of the treatment decisions concerning the clients
well being. They are therefore at the bottom of the health care and
service delivery system which operates at the Centre. The hierarchical
standing of the various occupational groups working at the Centre is
reinforced through the use of a number code to designate the level of the
staff position that a person fills. For the Residential Counsellors, this
consists of a four tier classification system ranging from RC I, for newly
hired recruits or trainees; to RC 11, which includes most of the RC staff;
to RC III, which is a supervisory position; and finally to RC IV, which
signifies a Unit Supervisor.

The other occupations in the Centre are similarly classified so that
it is quite easy to compare a person's status with people working in other
areas of the Centre. This has a number of ramifications for the staff,
especially in terms of promotions and job postings. The RC staff appeared
to be particularly cognisant of the staff hierarchy Operating in the Centre
and this was especially visible in both their dress and behaviour at the
Centre, towards other staff working their. For example, the RC staff wears
street clothes to work. At first sight this gives a relaxed, informal,
non-institutional appearance to the facility, however, this is somewhat
deceptive. Since the RC's are one of the only employee groups who do not
wear a uniform of one sort or another, they are easily identifiable in the

public or common areas of the Centre. In this way, their informal street

136

garb serves as a clear indication Of who they are and what their role is in
the Centre.

The secretarial staff at the Centre do not wear a uniform per se but
they are distinguishable from the RC's in that they are more formally
dressed in most cases.. The cafeteria staff, housekeeping staff and mainte-
nance each wear a different uniform. The people working in the Psychology
Department wear laboratory coats while the Physicians on staff wear suits
(both male and females in this case) with white jackets with their identi-
fication photo's on them. There is actually very little trouble in identi-
fying either who people are or where they work once an understanding Of the
Centre is acquired. There are, of course, exceptions to these codes but

they are adhered to, for the most part, by the staff at the facility.

II. Sample Selection and Data Collection.

The data for this study collected over a five day period during the
second week of August, 1982. At that time, all of the Residential Counsel-
ling staff working on the day and afternoon shifts at the Centre, who were
willing to participate, were included in the study. The Residence Supervi-
sor's (RC IV) as well as the RC III's were incorporated in the study at
this time, however, the major focus was the front line workers, the RC I
and RC II staff members. A total of 260 out of a possible 289 interviews
were conducted among the RC staff on duty during this period. This results
in a response rate of 89.9%. There is no reason for us to suspect that
there is any systematic bias in the data based on the 10.1% of the RC staff

who were unwilling to participate in the project.

137

An initial decision was made not to include the midnight shift in the
study based on a number of logistical factors. To begin with, staffing
levels on the midnight shift were such that it would have been extremely
difficult for any of the residences to allow a staff member the time away
from the Unit which was needed to participate in the study. Additionally,
as noted above, the Centre is in a rural area approximately one and one
quarter hours drive from the urban Centre where the research staff lived.
It would have been difficult to recruit enough qualified research assis-
tants to collect data on the midnight shift. Finally, shift rotation at
the Centre occurred at mid-week and this permitted those workers who had
been on midnights during the first part of the week to participate in the
study at the end of the week if they wanted to.

The data collection procedure resulted in the collection of 208
useable interviews with RC 1 and RC II's. 0f the initial 289 interviews
conducted, 52 involved either Residence Supervisors or other supervisory
personnel i.e., RC III's. These people were excluded from the analysis
since their work roles placed them in a position of power and authority
over the RC staff and it was felt that this could have influenced their
responses in a number of ways and, in particular, in favour of the adminis-
tration.

The instrument utilized in this study was made up of two parts; the
first consisted Of an interview schedule which included both forced choice
and open ended type questions; and the second of a self-filled question-
naire. The entire procedure took an average of one hour and ten minutes to
administer. Interviews were conducted in separate Offices in each Of the
four Units specifically designated for this purpose during the week that

the interviewing was in progress at the Centre.

138

A research staff of ten was recruited from a nearby University. Most
Of the researchers were graduate students in Sociology and had had previous
research experience. The rest were University or College graduates and
were familiar with social science research. A series of training sessions
was held with the entire research staff which included discussions about
interviewing techniques and coding procedures as well as a briefing on the
purpose of the project. The researchers were given the Opportunity to
administer the instrument to each other several times so that they were
familiar with it before they arrived at the actual site.

On each Of the five days during which interviewing took place, the
principle investigator and four research assistants arrived at the Centre
shortly after the breakfast routine had been completed by the residents.
Each interviewer was then assigned to one of the interview rooms and given
the necessary equipment. This included a quantity of blank interview
schedules which had appropriate identification codes on them. In addition,
each received a list of the sequence in which each of the residences in the
respective Units was to select one staff member to be interviewed. The
interview rooms were equipped with telephones which permitted the inter-
viewers to verify their schedules with the individual residences if
required or alert residences of delays or errors in the interviewing
process.

The principle investigator was in contact with all four interviewers
at this time, as well as with the Supervisory staff member who had been
made the liason person for the research project. Any scheduling problems
or other difficulties were handled by this person and this insured the
smooth operation Of the interviewing process. The preparations for the

study began two weeks before the interviewing team arrived at the Centre

139

and involved discussions with the Administration and the representatives of
the Union. Both gave their full support and this was effectively commu-
nicated to the Supervisory staff and the RC's. Everyone cooperated to make
the data collection process work very smoothly.

The scheduling Of the interviews was based on a plan developed by the
Facility Manager, the person in charge of staffing requirements and sched-
ules. A familiar rotation system was implemented and each residence was
given the freedom to send any one of their staff that was on duty when it
was their turn in the interviewing rotation. This served to reassure the
RC staff of their anonymity since they realized that the interviewers had
no way of knowing who they were, beyond the fact that they worked in a
particular residence.

The actual cooperation received during the week was quite remarkable
as the residences took it upon themselves to trade interview slots when
their internal work routines or staffing levels did not permit them to send
a staff member at an appointed time. There were a number of Open interview
spaces at the end of the week to accommodate those people who were unable
to come earlier. Each residence was called during this time as well and an
opportunity to participate was extended to all staff who had previously not
done so. It should be noted that the supervisory staff was very coopera-
tive and facilitated the interviewing process wherever they could.

The instrument used in this project was pre-tested on the staff of a
Day Care Centre who were qualified Early Childcare Workers. Additionally,
a number of Registered Nurses were also interviewed during the pre-test
phase. These workers are similar to the Residential Counsellors on a
number of key dimensions. For example, they have comparable educational

qualifications and both require government certification. Each of these

140

groups provides a service directly to people and in many ways their client
groups are quite similar. In fact, the actual work routines involve many
of the same types of activities such as teaching basic life skills, and
supervising recreational and other activities. Each group of workers has
the responsibility of caring for a group of people as part of their job.
The RC's and the Early Childcare Workers were also alike on a number
Of demographic characteristics. Most of these people were young women who
had had little previous work experience. A further area of comparability
is based on the nature Of the supervision each of these groups experiences.
The physical area Of the Day Care in many respects resembled the residences
at the Centre. People working in both of these places usually worked with
the same people for a period of time, sharing the responsibility for the
work which needed to be done. The nature of supervisory contact was quite
similar as well, especially given the physical proximity in which this took
place. The layout of the two work sites is such that the person supervis-
ing either group could have an excellent view of the "floor" from a vantage
point near the front of each facility. This is precisely where the super-
visor's office was located in both cases. The extent and type of super-
vision experienced by both groups Of workers therefore was quite similar.
The instrument itself included a number of items adapted from existing
scales whose reliability and validity has already been established. Two
such scales, the Lodahl and Kejner "Job Involvement Scale" and Lawler's
scale of Intrinsic Motivation, for example have already been described
above. The others which were included were drawn from similar types Of
sources. In fact, many of the items adopted from Faber's work had been
used successfully by the principal researcher in previous research applica-

tions.2

141

The pre-test served to identify several areas in the administration of
the instrument which needed changing in order to facilitate its use. These
changes were made and an acceptable format developed. The results of the
pre-test demonstrated that there was sufficient variability in the response
to each of the measures and depth interviews with the Child Care Workers
after the administration of the pre-test indicated that the wording and
intent of the items was satisfactory. A few minor alterations were
required in terms of its administration and these were made.

The instrument incorporated a self-coding procedure such that the
forced choice questions in both the interview and questionnaire portions
contained the appropriate codes. Many of the items employed a five point
Likert type scale and space was provided on the instrument itself for the
particular response selected. For the Open ended questions, the interview-
ers were briefed as to the intent of each question and instructed to write
out complete responses. They were also told to probe in specific ways when
the question was open ended and the intent of the question was either not
clear to the respondent or the answer given was clearly evasive. The
questionnaire portion of the instrument contained explicit instructions to
the respondents about its completion. Few problems were encountered in
this respect.

The commuting time between the Centre and the city in which the
interviewers lived afforded an excellent opportunity for the principle
investigator to deal with any coding problems which emerged during the
course of the study. In this way, a continual series of debriefing ses-
sions were conducted with the research staff and problems were quickly

ironed out. Coding reliability problems were also avoided since the coding

142

of the open ended questions was done exclusively by the principle inves-
tigator in this study.

The data from the interview schedules was entered directly into a
computer via a video display terminal. Each of the 208 cases required 182
columns to be entered. After the data entries had been "cleaned", ten
percent of the cases were selected at random and a comparison was made
between the original data on the interview schedule and the encoded data
and an error rate of less than 1% was found to exist. No problems have
been encountered in the computer manipulation Of the data which are related

to the encoding process utilized in this study.

III. A Description of the Residential Counsellors.

In this section, an overview Of the basic demographic characteristics
of the Residential Counsellors who took part in the study will be present-
ed. Table 1 contains the frequency distributions for the following vari-
ables: age; sex; marital status; and number of dependents. This informa-
tion indicates that most of the RC's are women. In fact, 82.4% or 154 of
the 187 people who answered this question were females as opposed to 17.6%
or 33 male respondents. Table 1 also shows that 67.3% of the respondents
were under 30 and 93.3% were under 40 years of age.

Of the 185 respondents who answered the question concerning marital
status, 34.6% report being single, 53.0% said they were married while 23
respondents or 12.4% of those who answered stated they were either separat-

ed, divorced or widowed.

143

Table 1A. Frequency Distribution for Age, Marital Status
and Number of Dependents. (in percents)

wee

Under 20 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55 and over
15.9 10.1 13.5 12.5 10.6 24.0 9.1 3.4 1.0 N=208

“We:
Male Female
17.6 82.4 N=187

iii) Marital Status

 

Single Married Separated Divorced Widowed
34.6 53.0 4.9 7.0 .5 N=185

iv) Number of Dependents

 

One Two Three Four Five or more
33.7 43.2 12.6 9.5 1.1 N=95

Table 18: Frequency Distribution for Employment History Items.
(in percents)

Length of Occupation at the Centre.

 

Less than from 2 4 to 5 5 to 10 ten years
2 years to 4 years years years or more
26.0 26.0 10.6 24.0 13.5 N=208

Number of Previous Full Time Jobs.

 

one two three four five or more

60.5 19.5 11.3 6.2 2.6 N=195

144

Table 1C.: Frequency Distribution of Parent's Occupation and
Education (in percents)

 

 

Professional, Technical Clerical, Sales or
or Managerial Blue Collar

Father's
Occupation 28.7 71.3 N=202
Mother's
Occupation 42.9 57.1 N=77

Some grade some high some college or

school school university

Father's
Education 45.4 38.3 16.3 N=196
Mother's
Education 32.3 47.5 20.2 N=198

Table 10.: Frequency Distribution for Religion Items
(in percents)

Protestant Catholic Other None
Religious
Preference 50.5 32.0 7.8 9.7 N=206
Active Not Active
How Active
in Religion 47.8 52.2 N=205

Table 1 indicates that 45% of the respondents had dependents. The
majority of these (76.8%) report having one or two dependents while 12.6%
stated that they had three dependents, 9.5% said they had four and 1.1% had
five dependents. 113 respondents or 54.3% of the RC's reported having no
dependents.

The RC's were asked how long they had worked at the Centre. The
results in Table 1B show that 26.0% or just over one quarter of the respon-
dents had been there for less than two years. An additional 26.0% report
being there for from two to four years. Twenty four percent Of the respon-
dents said that they had been there between five and ten years while only

13.5% said they had been there for ten years or more. The interpretation

145

of these results, however, changes when the answer to the question concern-
ing previous employment is considered. For example 60.5% of the respon-
dents who answered this question stated that this was the only job they had
held. An additional 19.5% indicated that this was the second full time job
that they had held. Thus, for fully 80% Of the respondents, working at the
Centre was practically the only full time work experience they had had.

These findings somewhat lessen the importance Of length of employment
if the respondents work history is really the principle concern. In the
present context, given the desperate state Of the labour market, the
employment patterns Of these workers may be characteristic of some develop-
ing trends. The work patterns demonstrated by young female workers in the
past, was that they worked for a while after marriage and then left the
labour market to start families. This may no longer hold. Even for young
women with no dependents, the lack of alternative employment opportunities
may be forcing many of these people to hold on to the jobs that they do
have. In either case, there do appear to be a number of people staying in
these jobs beyond age thirty. In fact, fully 30.7% Of the respondents were
between thirty and fifty years of age.

A number of other items in the survey focussed on the demographic
characteristics of the RC's. These included questions concerning the
occupation and education of the respondent's parents. Table 1C shows that
58 or 28.7% of the respondents had fathers who were in either professional,
managerial or technical occupations. This may be considered the tradition-
al white collar component of the workforce. The rest of the respondents
said that their fathers were employed in clerical, sales or blue collar
occupations. This totaled 144 or 71.3% of the respondents who answered

this question.

146

When asked what their mother's occupation was, 33 or 15.9% of the
respondents indicated white collar occupations while 44 or 21.2% named
clerical, sales or blue collar ones; 133 respondents or 63.0% reported that
their mother's did not work.

The results of the items on parental education show that 16.3% of the
fathers and 20.2% of the mothers of the respondents had some post secondary
education. For both groups, an additional 38.3% Of the fathers and 47.5%
of the mothers had completed some high school education. Some grade school
was reported for 45.4% of the fathers and 32.3% of the mothers. These
results suggest that these workers have been exposed to parents who have
had some experience in the educational system and for some, a great deal of
education. This may influence the response of these worker in a number of
important ways.

The final series of items which dealt with the respondents' personal
backgrounds is presented in Table 10 and includes questions which ask both
their religious affiliations and the extent of their religious activity.
This showed that 104 or 50.5% Of the respondents who answered these ques-
tions reported that they belonged to one of the Protestant denominations
while 66 or 32.0% said that they were Catholic. Of the remaining group, 16
or 7.8% indicated another religion and 20 or 9.7% said that they had no
religious affiliations. When querried as to their religious activity, 98
or 47.8% described themselves as either very active or somewhat active

while 107 or 52.2% said they were not very active or not active at all.

147

IV. Describing the Major Variables.
i) Alienation and the Quality of Working Life.

In our discussion Of alienation and the quality of working life
presented above, control over one's activity at work was described as an
essential aspect in the growth and development of human beings. Through
the exercise of free human activities, people could both satisfy their
needs and create their societies. The extent to which people are 'permit-
ted' to exercise control over their work activities was related in this
construct to their ability to satisfy increasingly higher needs.

The manner in which these concepts are Operationalized in the present
research reflects both of these concerns. There are measures, in the
study, which focus on the extent to which people are afforded the Oppor-
tunity to satisfy various levels Of human needs as well as ones which
examine the perceptions that the employees have of the extent Of their
control over their work. Neither of these, however, purports to measure
alienation or the level Of quality of working life experienced by the RC
staff directly. On the other hand, both types of measures can be seen as
indicators of the extent of alienation or of the actual quality of working
life being experienced. Therefore, neither need satisfaction or control
over work is itself equated with either alienation or QWL yet both demon-
strate the perceptions that these workers have of their ability to exercise
their human powers and abilities, to grow and develop at work and to
satisfy their needs through work.

A series of items which dealt with various levels of need satisfaction
were included in the interview schedule to measure the RC's perceptions of
this occurring at the Centre. These items ranged from concerns with

material rewards including such things as pay and benefits, to the satisfac-

148

tion of higher order needs. These included such things as the need to have
social interaction at work or to use one's skills and abilities on one's
job. A Factor analysis employing a Varimax Rotation was carried out on a
number Of these items. The resulting Martrix is presented in Figure 1
below.

The factor analysis identified seven 'factors' among the items includ-
ed and three of these in particular appear to be directly related to the
satisfaction of needs at work. The items in this matrix which reflect need
satisfaction included the following:

1. Compared with people doing similar types of work in this community, I
am well paid.

2. The benefits package in this job is very good.

Job security for people like me in this organization is very good.

People I work with encourage each other and work together.

Communications are good among my co-workers.

03 01 k 00
o o o o

If I have a problem on the job, I can count on my co-workers for help

and support.

7. If I should fall behind at work, I can count on my co-workers to cover
for me while I get caught up.

8. My job requires that I use wide range of my abilities.

9. My job requires that I keep on learning new things.

10. How much of the time do you use your training and skills to the
fullest on your job?
The first three items in this list deal with the satisfaction of basic

needs. A frequency distribution for these basic needs satisfaction items

is presented in Table 2 below.

149

TABLE 2: Frequency Distribution for Basic Need Satisfaction Items.

(in percents)

Neither
Strongly Agree nor Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
Item 1. Compared with
people doing similar types
of work in this community,
I am well paid. 19.8 53.1 11.1 12.1 3.9
Item 2. The benefits
package in this job
is very good. 14.5 62.8 11.1 9.7 1.9
Item 3. Job security for
people like me in this
organization is very good 16.9 65.7 7.7 7.7 1.9
N=208
The Factor Matrix indicated that these three variables 'loaded' much
higher on one of the factors. This includes Items 1,2, and 3 which appear
to focus on the satisfaction of basic material needs. The items in this
case deal with pay, benefits and job security. We will consider these
items separate from the others and refer to them as basic need satisfaction
measures. From Table 2, it is clear that there is widespread consensus
among the RC staff that the level of material benefits accorded them in
their jobs is quite good. In fact, between 72 and 82 percent of the staff
answered each of these questions positively. This indicates that the
perception of these workers is that their basic needs are being met through
their job at the Centre.

The three items used to measure basic need satisfaction were then

combined to form a single scale. These items were tested for scalability

150

in order to determine the appropriateness Of this procedure, that is
whether these three items were actually measuring different aspects Of the
same general concept. An Alpha score of .6153 was obtained after conduct-
ing a Reliability test on these three items. This met the minimum .6000
required to use these items in the construction Of a scale. Therefore,
based on these results as well as on the factor loadings which appeared in
the Matrix displayed in Figure 1, a scale termed the "Basic Need Satisfac-
tion Scale" was constructed using these three items. This will be used in
the data analysis presented below.

A similar procedure was followed with respect to the next four items
i.e., items 4,5,6 and 7. These four items also loaded on one factor in the
factor matrix presented in Figure 1. In this case, the factor in question
appears to be centered on the satisfaction of social needs through work. A
frequency distribution for these items is presented in Table 3 below.

The items depicted in Table 3 indicate that there is moderate support
for social need satisfaction among this particular group of workers.
Positive responses on these items range from a low of 47.8% to a high of
76.9%. While not excessively high, these results show that for the most
part, the interaction that staff members have with their co-workers while
on the job is quite positive. There is some indication therefore, that the
social needs of the workers are being met.

The items used to measure social need satisfaction were then tested
for scalability using a Reliability procedure and an Alpha score of .8847
was Obtained. This is very high and supports the combination of these
items into a single scale. Once again, the results of the factor analysis

described above also support this procedure since these items do load

fIGUlt 1: factor Matrix Including Need Satisfaction and Job Orientation Itens

factor factor factor factor factor factor
Two

Three

four

five

51:

factor
Seven

 

Iten I. Coepared to people doing
slnllar types of work in this
son-unity. I an well paid. .05
Item 2. The benefits package in

tFIs Job is very good. .12
Itee 1. Job security for people
115s ea in this organisation is
very good .05
Ite- 4. People I wort with
encourage each other and work
together. .07
[ten 5. Con—unications are good
anong ny co-worters .70
ten 6. If I have problens on the -

o . can count on ny co-worters

for help and support. .79
[ten 7. If I should fall behind
at sort. I can count on ny co-
workers to cover for no while I

et caught up. .69
[ten 0. My Job requires that I
use a wide range of ny abilities. .Il
Itee 9. My Job requires that I

esp on learning new things. .09
Iten 10. How ouch of the tine do
you use your skills and training

 

to the fullest on your job? .007

Iten 11. Working here brings us

tFe respect of ey fanily and

neighggurs. ' he -.02
tel . You can g ve an nest

opinion around here without any

hurry. .21
Iteo I). I an proud to tell people

w are work. .07
Iten 14. Around here. I an treated

as an adult. .19
[tin 15. In general. ny co-worters

an vs a good attitude about

:orting here. .59
ten 16. I use to care more about

worE 15.“ I do now. .10

‘ten . I often think of quitting. .05

The. II. If I could get a good

inying Job sonewhere else. I'd

leave this Job in a ninute. c.007

Iten 19. The naJor satisfaction in

 

 

 

my 11's cones fro. my Job. .0003

[is- 20. The lost ieportant things
t a appen to as involve ey Job. .06
an 21. 1 live. set and breathe
Iy o ,
Itee 22. Host things in life are
lore oportant than work. .07
ten 23. I an really a perfect-
00 9 about Iy work. 0.00
[ten 2‘. 1 an very ouch involved
Bertonally with Iy Job .02
en 25. when I do ny Job well. it
c ntr utes to ny personal growth
and satisfaction. .08
Its- 26. When 1 do ny Job well. it
g ves la a feeling of ecconplish-
nent.z’ ‘ ' .09
Itge . I fee a great sense o
personal satisfaction when I do
Iy Job well. .14
Itge 20. 0oing ny Job well in-
creases ey feelings of self
esteee. .03

.002
.24
-.01
.09
.10
.12

.13
.15

.11

.006
.16

.63
I
.54
.35
’0‘:
.19

.35

.07

-.09

.16

.22

.15

.25
..02

.62
.46

.70

-.01
.11

.14

-.02

'.12 I

.09

.06
-.05
.31

-.009

.16
.20
.009
.03
.07
.05
-.05
.08
-.20
-.12

151

TABLE 3: Frequency Distribution for Social Need Satisfaction Items.
(in percents)

Neither
Strongly Agree nor Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree

Item 4. People I work with
encourage each other and
work together. 21.3 46.9 16.4 9.2 6.3

Item 5. Communications are
good among my co-workers. 14.5 41.4 16.4 22.7 5.3

Item 6. If I have a problem

on the job, I can count on

my co-workers for help and

support. 25.0 51.9 15.9 4.3 2.9

 

Item 7. If I should fall

behind at work, I can

count on my co-workers

to cover for me while I

get caught up. 18.0 51.9 15.0 11.7 3.4
N=208

significantly higher on one particular factor in the Matrix presented in

Figure 1. Based on these results then, a scale named the "Social Need

Satisfaction Scale" using these four items was constructed for use in

further analysis.

The final three need satisfaction items relate to the use of skills
and abilities or the learning of new ones. These processes focus on the
satisfaction of self related needs or what we referred to in our discussion
above as higher order needs. A frequency distribution for these items is
presented in Table 4 below.

The results outlined in Table 4 suggest that there is a moderate

degree of support for all the items used to measure higher order need

satisfaction among the RC staff. Positive responses on these items range

152

from 47.1% to 65.7%. When these items were tested for scalability, an
Alpha score Of .6966 was obtained and this did meet the required .6000

level. Once again, additional support for this procedure was provided

TABLE 4.: Frequency Distribution for Higher Order Need Satisfaction
Item. (in percent)

Neither
Strongly Agree Nor Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
Item 8. My job requires
that I use a wide range
of my abilities. 23.7 42.0 13.5 17.3 3.4
Item 9. My job requires
that I keep on learning
new things. 13.0 39.1 15.0 25.6 7.2
Item 10. How much of the
time do you use your
training skills to the
fullest on your job? 16.3 30.8 27.4 10.6 14.9

by the Factor analysis in which these items were included. The Matrix pre-
sented in Figure 1 showed that these items had high loadings on one partic-
ular factor. Based on these results, these items were combined to form a

"Higher Order Need Satisfaction Scale" to be used in further analysis.

ii) Morale.

In this section, the variables used to measure worker morale will be
discussed. These variables are included in this report, as indicators Of
the attitudes and perceptions that the staff have of their jobs at the
Centre. In a sense, these items do not seek to assess the 'esprit de
corps' of these workers as much as they do the individual orientations that

each has to work and so 'morale' may well be a misnomer in this case. The

153

items reflect a range of perspectives that people sometimes take with

regards to work. The items used to measure worker morale included the

following:

1. In general, my co-workers and I have a good attitude about working
here.

2. I used to care more about work than I do now.

3. I Often think of quitting.

4. If I could get a good paying job somewhere else, I'd leave this job in

a minute.

5. I am proud to tell people where I work.

A frequency distribution of these items is presented in Table 5 below.

It can be seen from Table 5 that there is low to moderate support for
the items measuring morale. To make a comparison between items 1 and 5 and
2,3 and 4, it was necessary to reverse the order of the latter three
variables. This was done, and it can be seen that the positive responses
for these items range from 34.4, for item 2, to a high of 59.4 for item 5.
The average positive response, however is approximately 45% which indicates
that there is a degree of variability in the staff's perceptions of morale
but that overall, morale at the Centre is quite low.

In interpreting these results, it may be important to examine the
intent of these items more carefully. Items 1 and 5 offer the respondent
an Opportunity to express a positive response. Both of these items are
phrased in such a way as to stress the positive. Items 2,3 and 4 on the
other hand have a negative orientation and focus specifically on the types
of responses one would expect from someone who does not care very much

about his or her job. In this sense, a negative response on these items

154

indicates an instrumental orientation to work and reflects dissatisfaction
with working in this institution.

When a Reliability test was performed on these items, an Alpha of
.7821 was Obtained. This is quite high which indicates that these items
are in fact measuring different dimensions Of a single concept. This was
also evident in the factor loadings for these items shown in the Matrix

3 On this basis, a scale was constructed with these

displayed in Figure 1.
items and labelled the "Morale Scale."

Several other items were included in this study to measure morale and
the satisfaction people expressed over their jobs. These included the
following:

Item 1. How would you describe the morale where you work?
Item 2. Taking everything into account, how satisfied are you with your
job as it is now?

It is clear from the results presented in Table 6 that there is some
discrepancy between morale and job satisfaction scores. While 58.2% of the
staff report being satisfied with their jobs, only 28.7% describe morale as
high. This contradiction may be more apparent than real since interpreting
what the job satisfaction questions measure is quite problematic. There is
some question as to the meaning of job satisfaction scores in terms of
their reference to what else is available to people or whether the re-
sponses are based on a comparison the worker is making to either not
having a job at all or having a much worse job, with lower pay and poorer
working conditions.

The morale items however, may be seen as a reflection of the scores on
a number of specific dimensions related to their jobs. Thus morale is seen

to be distinct from job satisfaction and to be related more directly with

155

TABLE 5: Frequency Distribution Of Worker Morale Items

(in percents)

 

Neither

Strongly Agree Nor Strongly

Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
Item 1. In general my co-
workers and I have a good
attitude about working
here. 13.0 34.0 24.2 24.2 7.2
Item 2. I used to care
more about work than I
do now. 19.4 32.0 14.1 25.2 9.2
Item 3. I Often think
of quitting. 12.1 28.0 14.5 31.9 13.5
Item 4. If I could get
a good paying job some-
where else, I'd leave
this job in a minute. 17.9 18.6 25.6 30.9 7.2
Item 5. I am proud to
tell people where I
work. 10.6 48.4 25.6 11.1 3.9

N=208

A frequency distribution for these items is presented in Table 6
below.

TABLE 6: Frequency Distribution for Job Satisfaction Items.
(in percents)

Neither
High High Nor Low Low

Item 1. How would you describe the morale

 

where you work? 23.7 32.4 50.2
Item 2. Taking everything into account, Satisfied Dissatisfied
how satisfied are you with your
job as it is now? 58.2 41.8
N=208

the immediate work experience of the respondent as opposed to an overall
assessment of the job itself. The results on the morale item in Table 6

reinforce those reported in Table 5 above and support the interpretation of

156

them presented there which suggested that morale was moderately positive

among the staff.

iii) Job Involvement and Intrinsic Motivation.

In this section, two sets of items measuring Job Involvement and
Intrinsic Motivation will be outlined. These concepts were discussed above
as indicators of a person's particular orientation to work. Job Involve-
ment was described as a person's psychological involvement in their work.
The items used to measure this concept were taken from the Lodahl and
Kejner "Job Involvement Scale" outlined in our discussion above. These
include the following:

Item 1. The major satisfaction in my life comes from my job.

Item 2. The most important things that happen to me involve my job.
Item 3. I live, eat, and breathe my job.

Item 4. Most things in life are more important than work.

Item 5. I am a real perfectionist about my work.

Item 6. I am very much involved personally with my job.

These six items were included in the Factor analysis described above
and appear in the resulting Matrix presented in Figure 1. An examination
of the various factors identified through this procedure indicated that
these items did load higher on one in particular. These loadings included
Items 1 through 4 but did not include Items 5 or 6. The first four items
were combined and a Reliability test was performed on them to ascertain
their scalability. This produced an Alpha of .7258. Based on this, in

addition to the results of the Factor analysis, these four items were

157

combined to form a Job Involvement Scale for use in further analysis.
A frequency distribution for the job involvement items is presented in

Table 7 below.

TABLE 7: Frequency Distribution for Job Involvement
Neither

Strongly Agree Nor Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree

Item 1. The major satisfac-
tion in my life comes from
my job. 2.9 18.8 25.0 34.1 19.2

 

Item 2. The most important
things that happen to me
involve my job. 0.5 11.1 17.8 52.4 18.3

 

Item 3. I live, eat, and 0.5 1.9 5.8 36.1 55.8
breathe my job.

Item 4. Most things in life
are more important than work. 1.9 21.2 33.2 25.0 18.8

N=208

It is clear from Table 7 that the job involvement scores reported by
the RC staff are quite low. Positive responses on these items range only
from a high of 23.1% to a low of 2.4%. This suggests that many of these
employees do not see their jobs as being that important since few identify
with them. It is also indicative of a low level of self investment in the
work role as either a source of self esteem or as a basis for the eval-
uations of self worth by these people. This is related to the perceptions
that these employees have about the opportunity that work affords them for
maintaining a positive self image through large investments of themselves
in their jobs. This is apparently not the case for these workers.

Interpreting these results in terms of the broader theoretical con-

cerns expressed above, it may well be that these workers are experiencing

158

alienation and little quality of working life. This occurs essentially
because work is not seen as an area in which a person can satisfy higher
order, self related needs, but only more basic ones. Work in this sense
becomes a purely instrumental activity aimed at providing a pay check and
little else while other areas of a person's life become defined as being
increasingly more important to self related activities.

The procedure followed with respect to job involvement items was
repeated for the intrinsic motivation items developed by Lawler. In this
construct, intrinsic motivation was described in terms of the impact that
job performance has on a person's self esteem. The performance component
of this concept in particular differentiates it from job involvement and
other work-related attitudes which reflect the self esteem maintenance
process. This suggests that a person may be concerned with job performance
and the self esteem derived from positive evaluations at work. In general,
here however, these people may not define work as being a very important
part of their lives. This would result in high intrinsic motivation scores
and low job involvement scores. A similar distinction was pointed out in
our discussion of Moch's work on job versus organizational involvement
where it was suggested that people could be involved in their jobs and not
in the work organization and vice versa.4 This needs to be borne in mind
while interpreting the results of these measures. The items used to
measure intrinsic motivation included the following:

Item 1. When I do my job well it contributed to my personal growth and
well being.

Item 2. When I do my job well, it gives me a feeling of accomplishment.

Item 3. I feel a great sense of personal satisfaction when I do my job

well.

159

Item 4. Doing my job well increases my feelings of self esteem.

A frequency distribution of these items is presented in Table 8 below.

TABLE 8: Frequency Distribution for Intrinsic Motivation Items.
(in percents)

Neither
Strongly Agree Nor Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
Item 1. When I do my job
well it contributes to my
personal growth and
satisfaction. 18.3 67.3 10.1 2.8 1.9
Item 2. When I do my job
well, it gives me a feel-
ing of accomplishment. 24.0 69.7 4.3 1.9 0.0
Item 3. I feel a great
sense of personal satis-
faction when I do my
job well 35.1 54.3 8.2 1.9 0.5
Item 4. Doing my job well
increase my feeling of
self-esteem. 21.2 66.3 7.7 3.8 1.0

N=208

The responses to the items measuring intrinsic motivation were all
very strong and positive. These results range from 85.6% to 93.7% in
positive responses to these items. This makes it quite clear that work
role performance is identified as valuable by these workers in terms of the
way that it affects their self esteem and other measures of self worth. It
is important to note that this is related primarily to job performance,
given the types Of results reported on the job involvement measures dis-
cussed above.

In our description Of the Centre, we indicated that the RC's worked in

a highly stratified status hierarchy and that their work involved a great

160

deal of contact with people in positions both higher and lower to theirs.
In this case Faunce's analysis of this type of situation may best explain

5 Faunce suggests that it is difficult to avoid evaluating

these results.
yourself when you are constantly being evaluated by others who you have a
great deal of interaction with, even if you don't agree with the basis for
the evaluation. This is even more difficult when a high degree of status
differentiation exists as is the case at the Centre. The disparity in
these two measures therefore may be based on the recognition of the impor-
tance of job performance to self esteem while at the same time saying that
work is not the most important thing in life.

The relationship between intrinsic motivation and both alienation and
QWL rests on the opportunity which work affords people for human growth and
development. This includes the satisfaction of increasingly higher order
needs through work. While intrinsic motivation does reflect a recognition
of the importance Of work role performance to this, it also reflects the
nature of the immediate work environment. In some instances, it may be
possible for people who have low job involvement, and thus approach work in
an instrumental way, to avoid any type of evaluation at work which they are
concerned about. These people should then also have low intrinsic motiva-
tion since job performance is rendered unimportant to self esteem in this
instance. On the other hand, in the case of people like the RC's, it is
very difficult to avoid evaluation at work and therefore job performance
does take on some importance, even for those with low job involvement.

Perhaps the epitomy of an instrumental response to work would be that
of a person who has very low levels of intrinsic motivation in a job in
which frequent evaluations by peers and superiors is unavoidable. This

would demonstrate a complete withdrawal of self from the work role even in

161

the face of explicit and continuous evaluations by people with whom you are
forced to have frequent interaction. If Faunce is correct, this should
prove quite difficult for people to do!

A Reliability test was performed on both the job involvement and
intrinsic motivation items and this resulted in an Alpha score of .7259 for
the job involvement items and .8137 for the intrinsic motivation items.
Since both sets of items also loaded higher on a single factor in the
factor Matrix presented in Figure 1 we felt justified in combining these
sets of items into two scales named the "Job Involvement Scale" and the
"Intrinsic Motivation Scale" respectively. These will also be used in

further analysis.

iv) Organizational Variables.

In this section, a number of variables will be discussed which seek to
describe various dimensions of the organizational structure at the Centre.
Basically, these variables can be identified as the perceptions that the RC
staff have in terms of the authoritarianism, autonomy and democratic
supervision they encounter in the organization Of work. Each of these
focuses specifically on one aspect of the operation of the Centre and the
impact that this has on the nature of the jobs performed by the direct care
staff.

Authoritarianism refers to the extent to which the staff perceives the
administration at the Centre as being authoritarian in rule enforcement and
discipline matters. Autonomy on the other hand, focuses on the amount of
control these workers experience in performing their duties. Democratic
supervision attempts to ascertain the extent of democratic leadership

displayed by the supervisory staff at the Centre.

162

The items used to measure Authoritarianism included the following:
Item 1. I don't really like working here, all the rules and regulations
make you feel like you're in prison.
Item 2. The administration is much too strict in enforcing the rules
around here.
Item 3. Ultimately, my supervisor has too much control over my job.
A frequency distribution for these items is presented in Table 9

below.

TABLE 9: Frequency Distribution for Authoritarianism Items.
(in percents)

Neither

Strongly Agree Nor Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree

Item 1. I don't really like

working here, all the rules

and regulations make you

feel like you're in prison. 6.8 13.5 23.2 42.5 14.0
Item 2. The administration

is much too strict in en-

forcing the rules around
here. 8.3 24.3 35.4 29.6 2.4

Item 3. Ultimately, my

supervisor has too much

control over my job. 6.3 12.1 28.0 45.4 8.2

N=208

The frequency distribution for the items measuring authoritarianism

suggests that there is little support for these items among the staff. The

positive responses in this case are quite low ranging from 18.4% to 32.6%.

It appears that the staff do not perceive the administration as being

excessively strict in rule enforcement or disciplinary matters.

The items used to measure Autonomy included the following:

Item 1. I have a great deal of say over what has to be done on my job.

163

Item 2. My job allows me to determine my own workpace.

Item 3. I have a lot Of say over how work tasks will be divided among
myself and my work group.

Item 4. I have a great deal of freedom to run my own job.

A frequency distribution for these items is presented in Table 10 below.

TABLE 10: Frequency Distribution for Autonomy Items.
(in percents)

Neither
Strongly Agree Nor Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree

Item 1. I have a great deal
of say over what has to be
done on my job. 2.4 28.8 24.0 35.1 9.6

Item 2. My job allows me
to determine my own work-
pace. 8.2 37.5 24.5 26.0 3.8

Item 3. I have a lot of say
over how work tasks will be
divided among myself and my

work group. 6.8 29.0 23.7 32.4 8.2

Item 4. I have a great deal

of freedom to run my own job. 1.4 22.2 27.1 40.1 9.2
N=208

In table 10, the autonomy items are displayed. It can be seen from
this table that the workers report moderate to low levels of autonomy on
their jobs. The positive responses for these items range from a low of
23.6% to a high Of 45.7%. Negative responses for these items are also
moderate, however, suggesting a degree of variability in the workers'
perceptions Of this variable. The implications of this will be expanded
upon when these items are related to behavioural and attitudinal responses

to work as well as to other job factors.

164

The items used to measure Democratic Supervision included the follow-
ing:
Item 1. My supervisor encourages me to participate in important decisions.
Item 2. My supervisor encourages those he/she supervises to develop new
ways of doing things.
Item 3. My supervisor gives responsibility to those he/she supervises.
A frequency distribution for the democratic supervision items is presented

in Table 11 below.

TABLE 11: Frequency Distribution for Democratic Supervision Items.
(in percents)

Neither
Strongly Agree Nor Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
Item 1. My supervisor
encourages me to par-
ticipate in important
decisions 20.7 46.2 15.9 14.9 2.6
Item 2. My supervisor
encourages those he/she
supervises to develop
new ways of doing things. 13.5 52.2 18.8 20.3 4.18
Item 3. My supervisor
gives responsibility
to those he/she super-
vises 22.1 63.5 8.2 6.3 0.0

N=208
In discussing the results of Table 11, it is immediately apparent that
there is considerable consensus among the staff on these items. Positive
responses range from 56.0% to 85.6% while negative responses reflect a much
narrower spread going from 6.3% to 25.1%. These results indicate that the
supervisory staff at the Centre does employ democratic methods in their

work. Once again, the meaning of this finding will be determined in terms

165

of the relationship which it has to the workers behavioural and attitudinal
responses to work. This will be discussed below.

A Factor analysis employing a Varimax Rotation was performed which
included these items as well as several other items related to authoritar-
ianism, autonomy and democratic supervision. The resulting Factor Matrix
is presented in Figure 2. This indicates that four separate 'factors' were
identified among these variables. The first factor identified in this
Martix loads significantly higher on items 9 through 11 which were the
three items discussed above with respect to democratic supervision. The
second factor had higher loadings on items 4 thru 8 which were the items
included in our measure of autonomy, as well as on items 13 to 15 which
also measured autonomy. The third factor had significantly higher loadings
on the first three items which we included in our discussion of authoritar-
ianism. Factor four indicated higher loadings on items 12 to 15 and these
also all reflect autonomy.

The interpretation of the results Obtained in this Factor matrix is
complicated by the similarity which exists among the items dealing with
both autonomy and democratic supervision. This is evident in Factor One in
which items 4 and 6 demonstrate high factor loadings. The substantive
import of items 9 through 11, however, focusses specifically on the activ-
ities of the supervisor as they relate to autonomous action on the part of
the employees. Therefore, the use made of this factor analysis was to
verify and substantiate scaling procedure undertaken with items 9 through
11 which refer specifically to democratic supervision.

A similar argument can be made with reference to items 4 through 8 in
Factor Two. In this case, all the items have some degree of loading on

both Factor One and Factor Two. Additionally, items 13 through 15

166

demonstrated high loadings on this factor. Once again, the import Of this
procedure was to verify the combining of various items into a scale which
focussed on autonomy. A number Of items were included in the interview
schedule which were directed at this concept. Many were examined for
inclusion in an autonomy scale. Items 4 through 8 emerged as the most
suitable candidates in this regard after both the factor analysis procedure
and reliability testing were performed. On this basis, therefore, these
items were singled out for use as measures of autonomy. This also accounts
for our rejection Of items 12 through 15 which had high loadings on Factor
Four, and which also measured autonomy.

The three groups of items used to measure organizational variables
were each subjected to a Reliability test to determine their suitability
for scaling. The results of this test showed an Alpha score of .6776 for
the autonomy items, and one of .6958 for the democratic supervision items.
The authoritarianism items however produced an Alpha of only .5647 which
did not meet the required .6000 needed for combining these items into a
scale. However, since the Alpha level was very close to the required
threshold for scaling and with the results of the factor analysis which
showed that these items did load together, it was decided to combine these
items into a scale called the "Authoritarianism Scale." The same was done
for the other two sets of items resulting in the construction of an "Auton-
omy Scale“, and a "Democratic Supervision Scale." All three of these
scales will be used in further analysis.

It is important to point out here the differences between these three
scales, in terms of the meanings that they have for the types of work
experiences these respondents have. The Authoritarianism scale reflects

the staff's perceptions of the overall approach taken by the administration

167

FIGURE 2: Factor Matrix Including Organizational Factors.

Items 1. I don't really like working here,
all the rules and regulations make me feel
like you're in prison.

Item 2. The administration is much too
strict in enforcing the rules around

here.

Item 3. Ultimately, my supervisor has

too much control over my job.

Item 4. I have a great deal of say over
what has to be done on my job.

Item 5. My job allows me to determine my
own workpace.

Item 6. I have a lot Of say over how tasks
will Be divided among myself and my co-
workers.

Item 7. I can influence the decisions that
affect my job.

Item 8. I have a great deal of freedom to
run my own job.

Item 9. My supervisor encourages me to
participate in important decisions.

Item 10. My supervisor encourages those
he/she supervises to develop new ways of
doing things.

Item 11. My supervisor gives respons-
iBility to those he/she supervises.

Item 12. Most of the important decisions

 

in my job are made by the supervisor alone.

Item 13. I am told what I have to do on my
job.

Item 14. How much freedom do you have over
what you do on your job?

Item 15. When doing your job, do you
decide how much time to spend on a
particular task?

when dealing with discipline or rules concerning behaviour at

Factor Factor Factor

One

-.17

.06
-.33
.59
.21

.53
.35
.22
.70

.53
.61
.18
.02
.09

.04

Two

—.04

-.20
-.02
.32
.37

.28
.40
.52
-.Ol

.18
.08
.11
.25
.46

.44

Three

.67

.41
.53

.05

.04
-.008
-.O9
-.16

-.06

work.

Factor
Four

.008
-.27

.005

.07
.10
.17
.12

.09
.13
.68
.44
.35

.20

Democratic supervision, on the other hand refers to the staff members

immediate supervisor so that this may have a stronger or more

direct impact

168

on the behaviour and attitudes of these workers. A situation could exist
in which the workers may perceive the administration as being excessively
strict, while seeing their immediate supervisors as more democratic, or
vice versa. In this way, the Democratic Supervision Scale may have more to
tell us about the day-to-day work experiences Of these people than the
Authoritarianism Scale does.

Autonomy appears to be more closely related to the Democratic Super-
vision measures than it does to the Authoritarianism ones since it also
focuses on the employees' immediate work experiences. In this case,
workers may perceive a great deal of control over their immediate tasks and
yet little control over the larger questions of how the organization is
run. All the items in this particular scale are specifically related to
the worker's own job and his or her own ability to exercise some degree of
control over what happens on the job.

The results of Tables 9, 10 and 11 are consistent with our description
of the control processes operating with this group of workers. They are
not minutely controlled as are assembly line workers, thus do not perceive
the administration as being overtly strict. Similarly, the nature of the
tasks performed by these workers requires that they exercise a certain
degree Of discretion in selecting from a number of predetermined, appropri-
ate response to the situations that they encounter in their daily work
routines. The supervisors have to assume that these employees will be self
directed since it would be practically impossible to tell each of them
specifically what and how to do their jobs. This was described as an
"unobtrusive" type of control structure above and relies on the training
and "professional" socialization given to each Of these workers. In a

somewhat narrow sense, these people are in fact responsible for doing their

169

jobs properly and for the care and well being of the residents that they
work with. However, the basic patterns to be followed at work and the
techniques to be employed are clearly established well in advance and by
people other than the RC's themselves.

This discussion becomes even more relevant when the Autonomy items are
examined since these refer specifically to the jobs that these people do.
This is based on the job in a very immediate sense, in terms of such things
as having control over the workpace and dividing up work tasks among
themselves. Several points are worthy of note here. First, the variabil-
ity in the response to these items indicates that different workers in the
Centre perceive various amounts of control over their jobs. In our analy-
sis below, these items will be related to the particular units that these
people are working in to ascertain if each of the units exhibits higher or
lower scores on this dimension. Secondly, the measures of Autonomy may be
another indication of the type Of control experienced by these workers
since they may be able to exercise their discretion on the job but this
appears in the narrow and limited sense described above when dealing with
Democratic Supervision. That is, these workers have a certain amount of
latitude in their work roles which permits them to exercise their judge-
ments within certain predetermined parameters. Once again, they have the
responsibility for their work but may not have the power to make crucial
decisions. This will be examined more closely with respect to the rela-
tionship that exists between this measure and the satisfaction of various

levels of needs by these workers while on the job.

170

v) Worker Behaviour Patterns.

A number of items were included in this study which asked the workers
how they responded in certain situations or whether they had ever taken
part in various types of activities while working at the Centre. A series
of twenty of these self reported behaviour items were included in an
initial factor analysis. This procedure identified seven factors among
these twenty items however, many of the factors were unintelligible. A
second factor analysis was performed and eleven of the original twenty
items were included. The particular items selected for this second analy-
sis were those which appeared to be loading most highly on the identifiable
factors in the first analysis conducted.

The second factor analysis procedure identified three factors which
were more easily interpreted. The factor Matrix obtained in this process
is presented in Figure 3 below. The eleven items included in this matrix
were the following:

Item 1. When I see something wrong at work, I try to figure out how to
solve the problem and tell the supervisor about it.

Item 2. At work, I always try to figure out better ways of doing my job.

Item 3. I try to do a good job at work even if no one is around to see
it.

Item 4. Have you ever talked back to your supervisor or other superior?

Item 5. Have you ever refused to follow a direct order from your
supervisor?

Item 6. Have you ever turned your back and avoided taking responsibility

for things going on at work?

Item 7. Have you ever walked Off the job while on duty without
permission?

Item 8. Have you ever gotten really 'bitchy' or short tempered at work
because you were angry or frustrated?

Item 9. Have you ever yelled or screamed at a supervisor or other
employee because you were angry or frustrated at work?

Item 10. Have you ever 'deliberately' misplaced a report, memo or piece of
equipment because you were angry or frustrated with what was
going on at work?

Item 11. Have you ever 'borrowed' anything from work for your own personal
use?

171

FIGURE 3: Factor Matrix Including Behavioural Variables.

Item 1. When I see something wrong at work, I
try to figure out how to solve the problem and
tell the supervisor about it.

Item 2. At work, I always try to figure out
better ways Of doing my job.

Item 3. I try to do a good job at work even if
no one is around to see it.

Item 4. Have you ever talked back to your
supervisor or other superior?

Item 5. Have you ever refused to follow a
direct order from your supervisor?

Item 6. Have you ever turned your back and
avoided taking responsibility for things
going on at work?

Item 7. Have you ever walked off the job while
on duty without permission?

Item 8. Have you ever gotten really 'bitchy'
or short tempered at work because you were
angry or frustrated?

Item 9. Have you ever yelled or screamed at a
supervisor or other employee because you were
angry or frustrated at work?

Item 10. Have you ever 'deliberately' misplaced

a report, memo or piece of equipment because
you were angry or frustrated at work?

Item 11. Have you ever 'borrowed' anything from

work for your own personal use?

Factor

One

-.04

.11

.60

.43

.14

.20

.50

.61

.26

.24

Factor
Two

.57

.79

.56

-.01

-.01

.16

.01

.05

.005

.01

.16

Factor
Three

.18

-.05

.22

.18

.10

.52

.26

.26

.12

.32

.65

The first factor outlined in the Matrix in Figure 3 shows that Items

4, 5, 8 and 9 loaded significantly higher on this factor than did the rest

of the items. Upon closer examination, these items all appeared to be

concerned with situations in which the staff confronted their superiors.

These four items were then tested for scalability and Alpha of .6408 was

172

obtained indicating that they were in fact measuring various dimensions Of
a single concept. On the basis of both of these results, these items were
combined to form a scale named the "Confrontation Scale". A frequency
distribution for the individual items included in this scale is presented

in Table 12 below.

TABLE 12: Frequency Distribution Of Confrontation Items.
(in percents)

Not very

Often Often NO, Never
Item 1. Have you ever talked back to
your supervisor or other superior? 25.5 24.0 51.4
Item 2. Have you ever refused to
follow a direct order from your
supervisor? 6.3 22.6 84.6
Item 3. Have you ever gotten really
'bitchy' or short tempered at work
because you were angry or frustrated? 51.9 25.5 22.6
Item 4. Have you ever yelled or
screamed at a supervisor or other
employee because you were angry
or frustrated at work? 13.9 20.7 65.4

The results displayed in Table 12 show that instances of confronta-
tional behaviour decrease with the severity of the particular behaviour.
Thus while 54.3% report getting bitchy at work quite frequently, and 30.3%
stated that they talked back to their superiors frequently, incidence in
the frequency category drop to 15.4% for yelling at superiors or co-workers
and to 4.8% for refusing to follow a direct order. Clearly, refusing to
follow direct orders is perhaps serious enough to warrant the dismissal Of
the employee involved. It is not surprising to find that there is little
of this type Of behaviour present. On the other hand, the work environment

of these people and their place in the Centre's status hierarchy may

173

explain their willingness to verbalize displeasure, especially since the
difference between the RC II's and the RC III's who supervise them is quite
small and often based on little more than a few years of experience.

In fact, the RC III's have no additional training or qualifications and are
often former co-workers of the RC 11's. This does not appear to be seen as
serious as refusing to follow a direct order. Similarly, yelling repre-
sents a visible display of behaviour and based on its limited frequency Of
occurrence, one which is considered quite serious by the RC staff.

The items included in the Confrontation Scale therefore range from
very serious to less serious behaviour. The interpretation of this scale
is based on a recognition of this and is treated as an indication of the
extent to which an RC is involved generally in activity of this type. We
are assuming that those people willing to engage in the more serious forms
of behaviour are also willing to participate in less serious ones or vice
versa. NO attempt was made to assign weights to the individual items since
the thrust of the scale was not to determine the seriousness of the behav-
ioural responses of the workers as much as it was the extent of their
participation in them. The Confrontation Scale will be discussed further
in subsequent sections of this report.

The second factor identified in the Factor Matrix presented in Figure
3, was comprised of the first three items in the list. Each of these items
is based on some form Of cooperative behaviour which indicates a willing-
ness on the part Of the employee, to give more than the bare minimum
required to do the job. The three items included here were:

Item 1. When I see something wrong at work, I try to figure out how to
solve the problem and tell the supervisor about it.

Item 2. At work, I always try to figure out better ways Of doing my job.

174

Item 3. I try to do a good job at work even if no one is around to see
it.

A frequency distribution for these items is presented in Table 13 below.

TABLE 13: Frequency Distribution Of Co-operation Items.
(in percents)

Neither
Strongly Agree Nor Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
Item I. When I see some-
thing wrong at work, I
try to figure out how to
solve the problem and
tell the supervisor about
it. 18.4 61.8 10.1 9.2 0.5
Item 2. At work, I always
try to figure out better
ways of doing my job. 13.0 59.9 18.4 8.7 0.0
Item 3. I try to do a
good job at work even
if no one is around to
see it. 27.5 71.0 0.5 1.0 0.0

N=208
An examination of Table 13 reveals that the staff at the Centre reports
high levels of cooperation. Positive responses on these items range from
72.9% to 98.5%. When these items were tested for scalability, an Alpha of
.6643 was obtained, indicating that these items could be combined to form a
"Cooperation Scale". This was supported by the factor analysis described
above as well.

The remaining items in the factor Matrix did not appear to be measur-
ing a single concept since the third factor identified in the Matrix was
largely unintelligible. The items which received the highest loadings in
this case were item 6 which dealt with avoiding responsibility at work and

itenill which focussed on employee theft. There did not appear to be any

175

justification for considering these items together based on their substan-
tive import. Therefore, some of these behaviour items along with others

not included in this list will be dealt with separately in the data analy-

sis below.

176

CHAPTER FOUR

Data Analysis

 

In this chapter, the goals of the research discussed at length above
will be addressed. This will consist, for the mOSt part, of an analysis of
the relationships which exist between the major variables outlined in the
previous section. However, it will also include a consideration of the
differences which exist in the responses of the workers in the various
units of the Centre. An attempt will be made to determine if working in
the different parts of the facility is related to the job characteristics
peculiar to each of the four residential units.

Finally, the interview format employed in the data collection, afford-
ed us the opportunity to include a number of open ended questions in the
interview schedule. The focus of these items range from gaining some
insight into the method Of evaluation experienced by the RC staff to
describing the responses that the RC's made to a number of hypothetical
situations. This information will be included at those points in our
discussion where it best fits or where it will be most useful in clarifying

or highlighting particular concepts.

i) Alienation, QWL and Need Satisfaction.

The relationship between alienation, QWL and need satisfaction has
been elaborated upon a number of times in our discussion. It has been
stated above that we do not purport to measure either alienation or QWL
directly but focus instead on the extent to which people are afforded the

Opportunity to satisfy a variety of human needs at work. Alienation and

177

QWL were described on the basis of the Opportunity that people have to
exercise their powers and ability in the process of need satisfaction at
work. In the QWL literature in particular, this aspect of work was related
to the satisfaction of higher order (self-actualization) needs.

In the last chapter, a number Of items were outlined which sought to
measure need satisfaction among the RC staff. These were used to form
three need satisfaction scales including (i) the Basic Need Satisfaction
Scale, (ii) the Social Need Satisfaction Scale, and (iii) the Higher Order
Need Satisfaction Scale.

These three scales were crosstabulated first with the two scales which
dealt with the self reported behaviour items, the Confrontation Scale and
the Cooperation Scale. The results of this procedure are presented in

Tables 14 and 15 below.

TABLE 14: Cooperation by Basic, Social and Higher Order Need
Satisfaction. (in percents)

Basic Social Higher Order
High Low High Low High Low
Cooperation
High 69.4 62.2 72.0 60.4 78.6 55.6
Low 30.6 37.8 28.0 39.6 21.4 44.4
Gamma = .1581 Gamma = .2588 Gamma = .4915
Chi Square = .8371 Chi Square = 2.602 Chi Square = 11.2066

P=.36 P=.1O P=.001

178

TABLE 15: Confrontation by Basic, Social and Higher Order Need
Satisfaction. (in percents)

Basic Social Higher Order
High Low High Low High Low
Confrontation
High 49.2 60.2 50.0 55.7 41.8 64.2
Low 50.8 39.9 50.0 44.3 58.2 35.8
Gamma = .2202 Gamma = -.1132 Gamma = -.4278

Chi Square = 2.0160 Chi Square = .4540 Chi Square = 9.5158
P = .15 P = .50 P = .001.

The results of Table 14 indicate that there is a small positive
relationship between basic needs satisfaction and Cooperation however this
was not statistically significant. This produced a Gamma of .1581 which is
quite low. The tables suggest that Cooperation is not affected very much
by the level of basic need satisfaction experienced by these respondents.

The relationship between social need satisfaction and Cooperation is
only slightly stronger than that reported for basic need satisfaction
above. In this case the Gamma was .2558 indicating that a low to moderate,
positive relationship exists here. Once again the relationship was not
statistically significant. Social need satisfaction appears to be related
to higher levels of Cooperation however, this relationship is not large.

The relationship between social need satisfaction and confrontation
was found to be small and negative. The Gamma obtained in this case was
-.1132. The respondents reported only slightly higher levels of confronta-
tion when social need satisfaction was low than when it was high. Here
again, the percentage differences across these categories was not large.

Unlike both basic and social need satisfaction, the relationship
between higher order need satisfaction and both measures of worker behav-
iour was quite strong. In the case of cooperation, the Gamma obtained was

.4915 indicating a strong, positive relationship between these variables.

179

A strong, negative relationship was found between higher order need satis-
faction and confrontation producing a Gamma of -.4278. The portion of the
table where this is displayed shows that Cooperation is especially high
when higher order need satisfaction is high. Conversely, confrontation is
high when higher order need satisfaction is low. Both relationships were
found to be statistically significant. Higher order need satisfaction
appears to have a marked effect on both Confrontation and Cooperation.

These findings are consistent with the theoretical formulation out-
lined above. To begin with, the behaviour of these workers is related much
more closely to higher order need satisfaction than to either basic or
social need satisfaction. This should be the case when higher order needs
are being satisfied at work since work affords these people the Opportunity
to exercise their talents and abilities. This should be true of the
Cooperation items in particular if the theoretical discussion presented
above is viable since work is not defined narrowly or instrumentally but
positively and cooperation contributes to the satisfaction of higher order
needs. The 78.6% response rate in the high Cooperation, high, Higher Order
Need Satisfaction category makes this abundantly clear.

The relatively low relationship between both basic and social need
satisfaction and worker behaviour may be somewhat deceiving. The frequency
distribution presented above for the items which make up both of these
scales showed that most Of the RC staff reported very positive responses
for the satisfaction of both basic and social needs. The results for the
items that measured higher order need satisfaction on the other hand were
mixed, showing that a great deal of variability was present in the re-

sponses.

180

The relationship between both basic and social need satisfaction and
worker behaviour may have been much different if these two were not widely
perceived as being satisfied. In a situation where basic needs are not
being met and work offers no social compensations, the likelihood of
increased levels of Confrontation and decreased levels of Cooperation
should be higher. In the present situation, it was precisely those workers
who perceived basic, social and higher order needs as satisfied that were
the most cooperative at work. Those workers who did not perceive higher
order needs being satisfied were not nearly as cooperative as there co-
workers who did! If this held true for all of these measures of need
satisfaction, then the proposition that more Confrontation and less Coop-
eration would be likely when need satisfaction levels are low would be
supported.

These results also lend strong support to the contentions of the QWL
advocates. The items used to measure higher order need satisfaction are
precisely those which reflect the Opportunity which people perceive for
need satisfaction occurring at work. In many cases they constitute the
fundamental variables included in work redesign projects and they stress
the importance of a work organization in which people are given the chance
to use their skills and abilities and to grow and develop as human beings.
Perhaps the strong and positive relationship which was found between higher
order need satisfaction and Cooperation best attests to the viability of
the QWL approach since it is based on variables which form part of the
human dimension Of work; a dimension which does not depend on technology
whatsoever but rather on people and relationships. These are most accessi-

ble for changes in existing organizations according to the QWL supporters.

181

ii) Morale.

Our discussion of Morale thus far has served to identify the variables
used to measure morale and to present the frequency distributions of these
items. In this section, the relationship between morale and worker behav-
iour will be discussed in conjunction with a consideration of the relation-
ship between morale and the organizational factors described above. It was
noted in our earlier discussion that the morale among the direct care staff
was moderately low, with only approximately 45% of the workers responding
positively to the items in the Morale Scale. In order to determine what
types of factors were affecting morale at the Centre, the following ques-
tions were asked:

Item 1. What would you say is the one thing that most affects morale
where you work?

Item 2. Why are/you/not satisfied with your job?

Item 3. What one thing is there about your job that makes it particularly
interesting?

Item 4. What one thing is there about your job that makes it particularly
rewarding?

Item 5. What one thing is there about your job that makes it particularly
difficult?

Item 6. What one thing is there about your job that makes it particularly
undesirable?

A frequency distribution for these items is presented in Table 16 below.

It is clear from Table 16 that in Item 1, both the administration and
the co-workers are a major source Of morale. This is reflected in Item 2

Of the Table as well since 44.6% of the respondents cited either i) lack of

182

TABLE 16: Frequency Distribution for Items Affecting Morale.

Economic The Admin- Co- Job
Factors istration Workers Factors Clients
Item 1. What would you say
is the one thing that most
affects morale where you
work? 16.2 48.0 28.8 3.0 4.0
N 198

Positive Responses Due To:
Nature Pay Co- Autonomy
of Job Received Workers On The Job
Item 2. Why are you/are
you not satisfied with
your job? 3.0 1.5 7.4 1.5
Negative Responses Due to:

Lack of
Lack Of Administra- Job Achievement
Autonomy tion Action Factors With Clients
17.8 11.4 15.4 42.1
N=202
Item 3. What one thing Interaction Meet Variety Changing Autonomy

is there about your job With Clients Of People Routine On Job
that makes it part-

icularly interesting? 51.8 7.5 32.2 8.5
N=199
Item 4. What one thing Client Recognition
is there about your job Progress of Effort Money Other
that makes it particularly
rewarding? 80.7 8.4 4.5 6.4
N=202
Lack of
Item 5. What one Adminstra- Other Other Job Response
thing is there about tion Action Staff Factors From Clients
your job that makes it
particularly difficult? 80.7 21.4 34.3 11.4
N=201
Lack of Fear of Job Factors
Admin- Client Physical (shift
Item 6. What one thing stration Progress Harm Work, etc.)

is there about your job

that makes it particular-

ly undesirable? 20.3 10.7 7.0 60.0
N=187

183

autonomy, ii) administrative action, or iii) job factors (which included
relations with other co-workers among other things) as reasons for being
dissatisfied with their jobs. This is consistent with our theoretical
framework which suggests that social relations which characterize a work-
place organization are reflected in various forms of administrative action
which affects the ability of the workers to determine their own lives at
work. In our analysis, this was related to both alienation and low levels
of OWL and it may find expression in the verbal, attitudinal or behavioural
responses of these workers. This may be precisely the case with respect to
the measures of morale described above.

In Item 2 in this table, 42.1% of the staff report being dissatisfied
with their jobs as a result of the “lack of achievement with clients."
This particular label was attached to this category in a non-pejorative
manner, in order to convey a certain level Of frustration expressed by the
direct care staff, with being unable to do mgrg for the residents. Strict-
ly speaking, this is not related to job satisfaction but reflects instead,
a very high level of commitment to the clients on the part of these work-
ers. The results reported in Item 3 and 4 substantiate this interpreta-
tion. For example, 51.8% of the staff reported that the clients are the
one thing that makes their jobs interesting. Similarly, 80.7% identify
"client progress" as the one thing that makes their jobs rewarding. Both
of these items demonstrate the strong commitment that the residential
counsellors have to the clients Of the Centre and show why the staff is so
concerned with client progress.

Item 5 of this table indicates that 54.2% of the RC's think that the
adnfinistration and co-workers are the factors which make their jobs diffi-

culi; An additional 34.3% of the respondents cite job factors as

184

responsible for the difficulty. These factors include such things shift
work, the "heavy" parts of the job, such as lifting or cleaning, and
various other job related activities.

In Item 6, Job Factors was selected 60% of the time as being the one
thing that makes the job particularly undesirable. Shift work and weekend
work were reported most often in this regard and this is not surprising
given the demographic characteristics of the RC staff.

The picture which emerges from the examination of the factors which
affect morale among the residential counsellors suggests that both the
administration and the relationships which exist between co-workers are
vitally important for morale. In a very important sense, the adminis-
tration affects both of these since it is directly responsible for the
decisions which determine work assignments. Worker interaction can be
ameliorated through scheduling practices which seek to establish compatible
work groups. This is extremely important for these workers since their
work routines require them to work in close proximity. Their staggered
lunch and break shifts mean that they may have a limited number of people
to socialize and to relax with. These times are especially important since
it gives them a chance to "let Off some steam" when they are off the units.
There was little doubt after interviewing a number of these workers, that
the job entails a great deal of pressure. This is primarily due to the
unpredictability of the clients and the total responsibility that the RC
staff has for their care and well being. It is essential that the people
who work together in the various units cooperate and communicate with each
other for the job to be done properly. When these positive relations do
not exist, there is the potential for a very explosive situation to devel-

op. In this particular institution, we were informed that in most cases,

185

the administration was willing to accommodate the wishes of the workers and
transfers were arranged most of the time when they were requested by the
staff for interpersonal reasons. This was usually affected by the unit
supervisors themselves, who were in charge of scheduling and therefore
could move people around to various shifts. Transfers between units
however were much more difficult to Obtain.

With respect to administrative action, the workers were sensitive to
such things as having information about proposed changes in the institu-
tion, especially if these changes affected them personally. There was also
some concern expressed by the staff about a number of actions which the
administration had taken with regard to running the facility. Parking
regulations topped this list and there was widespread dissatisfaction with
the way that the parking regulations had been changed, as well as what they
had been changed to. Most of the complaints included some statement about
the unilateral and arbitrary manner in which this change had been carried
out.

A word of caution is needed before any interpretation of the adminis-
trative action category is made. It represents a condensed category which
includes a range of responses to an open ended question. As such, it
focusses on the general thrust or content of the responses related to
administrative action but does not reflect a singular response.

It can be concluded from this analysis that the administration can
have a tremendous impact on worker morale. This can come directly through
action which it initiates or indirectly through the control it has over
such things as the establishment of work groups and staff assignments.
This is significant since these actions affect a marked change in the

attitudes expressed by the staff towards work. Further analysis will focus

186

on whether this is also related to the actual behaviour of the staff as
well. In either case, these changes do not depend on the acquisition of
new technology or sophisticated hardware but rest solely on the manner in
which work is organized at the Centre. This reflects to a large extent,
the actions that the administration takes and the way that the staff
responds (i.e., to the existing social relations). These should be easier
to change according to the advocates of OWL, than demographic factors based
on age, sex, religion or race, etc.

Turning now to an examination of the impact of need satisfaction on
morale, we find that a number of the results described above with respect
to self reported behaviour items and need satisfaction are mirrored in
these findings. The results of a crosstabulation of morale with the
various need satisfaction scales is presented in Table 17 below.

The results displayed in Table 17 indicate that there is a low,
positive relationship between morale and basic need satisfaction resulting
in a Gamma Of .1295. Morale was only slightly affected by the workers
perceptions of basic need satisfaction, however this did show that morale
was lower when basic need satisfaction was lower.

A moderate, positive relationship was found to exist between social
need satisfaction and morale. This relationship produced a Gamma of .2884
and the table shows that almost 15% more of the respondents in the high
morale category reported high social need satisfaction.

The last part of the table presents the relationship between morale
and higher order need satisfaction. In this case there was a strong,
positive relationship reported with a Gamma of .5782. The table shows that
31.8% more of the people who reported having high morale also reported high

levels of higher order need satisfaction. This is clearly the strongest

187

TABLE 17: Morale by Basic, Social and Higher Order Need Satisfaction.

 

Basic
Need
Morale Satisfaction
High Low
High 52.8 46.3
Low 47.2 53.7
Gamma=.1295

Chi Square=.5927

(in percents)

 

Social

Need
Satisfaction
High “L9!
58.0 43.3
42.0 56.7
Gamma=.2884

Chi Square=3.8557
P=.44 P=.05

Higher Order
Need

 

Satisfaction
mm.
67.0 35.2
33.0 64.8
Gamma=.5782

Chi Square=19.4504

relationship reported in the table and demonstrates the importance of the

relationship between the satisfaction of higher order needs and people's

attitudes towards work.

It can be seen from these results that need satisfaction and higher

order need satisfaction in particular, can have a tremendous impact on

worker morale. Worker morale was found to increase in each case as the

workers were able to satisfy their needs through work.

Once again it is

significant that both basic and social need satisfaction had less of an

impact than did higher order need satisfaction on this relationship. This

could be due to the fact that both basic and social needs are taken for

granted by these employees since they are perceived so positively by the

staff. Higher order need satisfaction however was not perceived this way.

It appears that those workers who perceive their higher order needs as

being met are also experiencing higher morale levels.

This explanation

follows directly from our theoretical discussion above since workers should

respond more positively as needs are satisfied at work.

It would be

interesting, however, to examine the same relationship under circumstances

188

in which either or both the basic and social needs were not perceived so
positively as being satisfied by the staff.

Finally, the impact that various organizational factors have on morale
was examined. This included the workers perceptions contained in the
Authoritarianism, Autonomy and Democratic Supervision Scales. The results
of a crosstabulation of these scales and morale is presented in Table 18
below.

The relationship between morale and authoritarianism proved to be very
strong and negative producing a Gamma of -.8136 which is very high. This
demonstrates that morale is low when high levels of authoritarianism are
perceived by the staff. In this case, 79.1% of the respondents in the high

authoritarianism category reported having low morale while 72% of those

TABLE 18: Morale by Organizational Factors.
(in percents)

 

 

Democratic
Authoritarianism Autonomy Supervision
High Q High _Lo_w High Lg
High 20.9 72.0 61.2 38.6 58.3 41.7
Low 79.1 28.0 38.8 6l.4 4l.6 58.4
Gamma= -.8136 Gamma=.4292 Gamma=.3243
Chi Square=49.9461 Chi Square=9.4911 Chi Square=5.0200

P .OOl P .OOl P = .02
N=208

respondents in the low authoritarianism category reporthaving high morale.
This relationship is supported by our discussion above regarding the types
of controls which are possible given certain historical, social and econom-
ic conditions. Thus, we suggested that what Edwards had described as

"simple" control which relied heavily on an authoritarian approach and

189

included using force and coercion, was least applicable to these types of

1 Their education; their knowledge of the law and their rights;

workers.
their lack of fear of the economic consequences of being unemployed; all
contribute to making this type of control either unworkable or extremely
costly to implement with these workers. Perrow's discussion on this topic
suggested that the more "unobtrusive" types of controls were more suited to
this type of situation and the results of Table 18 clearly show that
authoritarianism has a sizeable impact on the morale of these workers.2
This analysis will be extended below to include the relationship between
authoritarianism and worker behaviour.

The relationship between morale and autonomy proved to be less pro-
nounced than that involving authoritarianism, however it was strong and
positive. The Gamma in this case was .4292 with approximately 24% more
people in the high morale category reporting high autonomy as well. This
also reflects the theoretical discussion above since the autonomy items
focussed on a person's opportunity to exercise control over work. High
morale should be a consequence of high autonomy in this conceptualization.

A moderate, positive relationship was found to exist between morale
and democratic supervision and a Gamma of .3243 was Obtained. In the
table, morale scores were low when democratic supervision scores were also
low and vice versa. The difference in cell frequencies was approximately
16% in this case, which suggests some influence but one which is not nearly
as strong as that reported for either authoritarianism or autonomy.

The results reported in this section are similar to the ones discussed
above when dealing with morale and need satisfaction. The impact in this
case, however, was much more pronounced. Morale was shown to vary directly

with each of the organizational items and with authoritarianism in

190

particular. These organizational items represent the perceptions that the
residential counsellors have of the nature of the organizational structure.
They are not based on technology or some other external factor but on the
very nature of the work organization which they experience in their daily
working lives. The whole orientation of the QWL approach suggests that
these should be accessible to positive changes. The role that control over
work plays in underscoring the social relations at work was also pointed
out in our discussion Of alienation. This was evident in the results
presented in this table and it was particularly evident in the case of
authoritarianism.

The significance of these findings may be best demonstrated in a
consideration of the affects that morale has on the worker behaviour
measures. It is to this discussion that we now turn.

Morale was crosstabulated with the measures of worker behaviour
described above, including the Cooperation and Confrontation Scales. These
results are presented in Table 19 below.

The relationship between morale and cooperation was found to be
moderate and positive with a Gamma of .3266. Table 19 shows that high
cooperation is related to high morale, thus 73.8% of the respondents in the
high cooperation category report having high morale. This drops to 58.8%
when the respondents report having low morale. The 25% difference across
this category represents a substantial drop and provides a key to interpre-
ting this part of the table.

When the relationship between morale and confrontation was examined, a
Gamma of -.6212 was found. This indicates that a strong, negative rela-

tionship exists between these two variables. The table shows that there

191

were higher confrontation scores in the low morale category and that this

difference was almost 35%. This represents a large difference and points

TABLE 19: Morale by Worker Behaviour Measures.
(in percents)

Morale Cooperation Confrontation
H. 19h e»: We 1211M-
High 73.8 26.2 35.9 64.l
Low 58.8 41.2 70.6 29.4
N=208
Gamma = .3266 Gamma = .6212
Chi Square = 4.4902 Chi Square = 16.9883
P = .03 P .001

out the influence that morale has on confrontation.

Both of the relationships described in Table 19 reflect the ideas
which underscore QWL. Cooperation is more likely when people have a
positive attitude towards their work and conversely, confrontation is more
likely when a positive attitude toward work is absent. This takes on
particular significance in the present context, given the impact that
higher order need satisfaction, authoritarianism and autonomy were found to
have on morale. In each case, these represent factors which reflect the
nature of the workplace organization and the control that people exercise
over their activity at work. An enhancement of these factors is related to
higher morale levels which in turn is related to more cooperation and less
confrontation. This supports the job redesign strategies proposed by
advocates of OWL and shows how this depends on a reformulation of the
existing social relations at work such that the workers are given more
control over their lives. This is also the basis for our discussion of

alienation.

192

It must be noted at this point that neither of the measures Of worker
behaviour were constructed as indicators Of the productivity of these
workers. The Cooperation items in particular, focussed on the behaviour of
workers which exceeded that which was minimally expected of them and in a
sense implies that these workers approach work in a very positive way as
Opposed to either a negative or instrumental one. It may well be that both
the quality and the quantity of work performed by these employees is
directly related to morale and the factors which affect it. The results of
the cooperation scale suggest that this be the case, although this proposi-
tion can neither be substantiated nor rejected on the basis of the data
presented here. This would entail a detailed examination of the job
responsibilities and performance levels of the RC staff and this was beyond
the scope of the present research. What is clear from these results
however, is that morale does have an important impact on the way that

people behave at work.

iii) Job Involvement and Intrinsic Motivation.

Job involvement and intrinsic motivation were described above as two
types of orientations that peOple have towards work. In this section, the
various factors which affect these orientations are examined in more
detail. In addition, the relationship between orientation to work and
worker behaviour is outlined.

To begin this task, the job involvement and intrinsic motivation
scales were crosstabulated with the various need satisfaction scales
described above. Next, the relationship between both job involvement and
intrinsic motivation and the scales measuring organizational factors was

examined. Finally, the relationship between orientation to work and worker

193

behaviour was looked at. The results of the crosstabulations Of the need
satisfaction scales and the orientation to work scales is presented in

Tables 20 and 21 below.

TABLES 20: Job Involvement by Basic, Social and Higher Order
Need Satisfaction. (in percents)

Higher Order

 

 

 

 

Job Basic Need Social Need Need
Involvement Satisfaction Satisfaction Satisfaction
High Low High Low High Low
High 58.1 48.2 56.0 52.8 69.4 40.4
Low 41.9 51.8 44.0 47.2 30.6 59.6
N=208
Gamma = .1962 Gamma = .0638 Gamma = .5400
Chi Square = 1.5739 Chi Square = .1002 Chi Square = 16.3532

P = .20 P = .75 P .001

TABLE 21: Intrinsic Motivation By Basic, Social and Higher Order
Need Satisfaction. (in percents)

Higher Order

 

 

 

 

Intrinsic Basic Need Social Need Need
Motivation Satisfaction Satisfaction Satisfaction
High Low High Low High Low
High 37.1 38.6 39.0 35.8 52.0 24.8
Low 62.9 61.4 61.0 64.2 48.0 75.2
N=208
Gamma = .0300 Gamma = .0672 Gamma = .5344
Chi Square = .0043 Chi Square = .1044 Chi Square = 15.2016
P = .94 P = .74 P .001

In Table 20, job involvement is related to basic, social and higher
order need satisfaction. The results presented in this table indicate that
only a slight positive relationship exists between job involvement and both
basic and social need satisfaction. However neither relationship was
statistically significant. The Gamma scores obtained here were .1962 and

.0638 respectively. In the case of higher order need satisfaction however,

194

a strong and positive relationship was found. The Gamma here was .5400.
and the relationship was statistically significant at the .001 level.

The results suggest that job involvement is not influenced a great
deal by either basic or social need satisfaction. It is affected however,
by higher order need satisfaction. This is clearly demonstrated in the
table as 29% more of the respondents in the high, higher order need satis-
faction category also report having high levels Of job involvement. Job
involvement was lower in all cases when need satisfaction scores were low,
but again, this result was most pronounced in the higher order need satis-
faction part of the table.

The results in the case of intrinsic motivation were quite similar to
those found with job involvement. The relationship between intrinsic
motivation and basic need satisfaction was low and negative with a Gamma of
-.O309. The relationship found between intrinsic motivation and social
need satisfaction was low and positive producing a Gamma of .0672. Neither
basic nor social need satisfaction appear to have much of an affect on the
intrinsic motivation scores. These relationships were not statistically
significant.

The relationship between intrinsic motivation and higher order need
satisfaction presented a different pattern, as the results indicate that a
strong positive relationship exists. The Gamma Obtained in this case was
.5344 and the table shows that intrinsic motivation is especially low when
higher order need satisfaction is also low. The percentage difference
between scores in these two categories is 27.2% which is quite large. This
relationship was statistically significant at the .001 level.

The relationship between both job involvement and intrinsic motivation

and higher order need satisfaction was strong and positive. This is

195

consistent with the discussion of both of these items presented above, in
which these orientations to work were described in terms of the importance
that work holds for contributing to a person's identity and feelings of
self esteem. It is important to point out that both of these orientations
were not greatly affected by either basic or social need satisfaction
scales.

The strong relationship found between higher order need satisfaction
and both job involvement and intrinsic motivation was anticipated by our
earlier discussion since both Of these orientations toward work are based
on the contribution that the work experience makes to self esteem. This
was specifically pointed out with respect to intrinsic motivation which was
described in terms of the affect that job performance has on self esteem.

A similar relationship between the work situation and job involvement was
suggested so that in instances where higher order, 'self', needs are being
fulfilled, it is not surprising to find people defining work as an impor-
tant part of their lives or for being motivated to perform their work well.
The reverse of this situation, however should also hold, especially with
respect to basic and social need satisfaction.

In situations where job involvement and intrinsic motivation is low
and work is not seen as offering much in the way of positive measures of
self, the most instrumental concerns should emerge. These should be based
primarily on the satisfaction of material needs i.e., basic needs in our
study, or social needs. This was not the case here, however, since the
relationship between these variables was very low. The slight, negative
relationship found between intrinsic motivation and basic need satisfaction
begins to move in this direction but the percentage differences involved

are not significant.

196

One plausible explanation for these findings is that both basic and
social order need satisfaction may be taken for granted by these workers
since there is widespread consensus among the staff concerning their
satisfaction. Once again, it would be interesting to see what would happen
in a situation in which either or both of these needs were not being met.
Perhaps then, the relationship which we anticipated would appear and peOple
with low job involvement and low intrinsic motivation would be more con-
cerned with the satisfaction of basic or social needs.

Some support for this position can be garnered from the responses of
the RC staff to the following questions concerning basic and social need
satisfaction at work. The RC's were asked whether they preferred to work
in a place where people talk and joke around or whether they preferred to
work alone. They were also asked how things were in this regard, where
they worked. The answers given to these questions indicate that 88.3% of
those who answered the question preferred a place where people talk and
joke around and 90.8% reported that people did talk and joke around at
work.

Similarly, the following statement was read to the respondents and
they were asked to agree or disagree. The statement was; "If I left this
job, I could find a similar or better job." Only 2.9% strongly agreed with
this statement and a further 35.3% said that they agreed. The rest of the
staff did not respond positively to the statement.

These results suggest that most of the staff members find their work
relations to their liking and that they are quite cordial since the people
that they work with talk and joke around. Also, over 60% of the staff did
not think that they could find a similar or better job. This may indicate

that the pay and the benefits received by these workers are seen as being

197

quite good considering the circumstances. In fact, many Of the respondents
commented during the interviews that they were paid well at the Centre and
that that was one of the things which attracted many people to the job and
kept them there. In light of this information therefore, basic and social
need satisfaction do not appear to be pressing issues among the staff at
the Centre.

The next set of relationships to be examined are those between the
organizational factors and both job involvement and intrinsic motivation.

These are displayed in Tables 22 and 23 below.

TABLE 22: Job Involvement by Organizational Factors.
(in percents)

 

 

 

Job Democratic
Involvement Authoritarianism Autonomy Supervision
High Low High Low High Low
High 40.2 63.9 62.5 45.l 61.2 48.1
Low 59.8 36.1 41.1 54.9 38.8 51.9
N=208
Gamma = -.4484 Gamma = .3397 Gamma = .2595
Chi Square=10.3673 Chi Square=5.5947 Chi Square=3.0674
P=.001 P=.01 P=.O7

TABLE 23: Intrinsic Motivation by Organizational Factors.
(in percents)

 

 

Intrinsic Democratic
Motivation Authoritarianism Autonomy Supervision
High Low High Low High Low
High 33.1 40.3 46.2 29.4 46.6 28.8
Low 66.7 59.7 53.8 70.6 53.4 71.2
N=208
Gamma = —.1497 Gamma = .3457 Gamma = .3656
Chi Square=.7750 Chi Square=5.4440 Chi Square=6.2120

P=.37 P=.Ol P=.01

198

Table 22 shows that a moderate to strong, negative relationship exists
between job involvement and the workers' perceptions Of authoritarianism at
work. This relationship was statistically significant and produced a
Gamma of -.4484. The table indicates that job involvement decreased
sharply as the perception of authoritarianism increased. This is evident
in the high job involvement category in which 40.2% of the respondents were
in the high authoritarianism cell while 63.9% were in the low authoritar-
ianism cell.

The relationship between job involvement and autonomy proved to be
moderate and positive. The results here were in the opposite direction to
those in the Authoritarianism section Of the table. Thus, job involvement
was highest when autonomy was highest and lowest when autonomy was lowest.
The Gamma Obtained in this case was .3397.

In the final section Of the table, it can be seen that there is a low
to moderate, positive relationship between job involvement and democratic
supervision. A Gamma of .2595 was found here. Once again, job involvement
decreased as democratic supervision decreased and vice versa. This also
reflects the trends found in the other sections Of the table.

Turning now to Table 23, the relationship between intrinsic motivation
and authoritarianism was found to be low and negative. The Gamma in this
case was -.1497. The table shows that intrinsic motivation also highest
when authoritarianism was lowest. This is reversed in the low intrinsic
motivation category which had the largest number of respondents in the low
authoritarianism cell. Intrinsic motivation therefore was high when
authoritarianism was low but the Observed association was not statistically

significant.

199

The next section of Table 23 focussed on autonomy. The relationship
in this case was found to be moderate and positive with a Gamma of .3457.
The table shows that intrinsic motivation was high when autonomy was high.
The reverse of this, that is that intrinsic motivation was low when autono-
my was low was also true.

The relationship between intrinsic motivation and democratic super-
vision was moderate and positive with Gamma of .3656. Once again, the
table shows that intrinsic motivation was high when democratic supervision
was high and low when democratic supervision was low. This finding is
consistent with those in the other sections of the table.

It can be seen from an examination of the results of tables 22 and 23
that both job involvement and intrinsic motivation are related to the
organizational factors. While this relationship is not excessively strong
in most cases, the results all appear to go in the same direction and in
the case of job involvement and authoritarianism it was found to be fairly
high. These results are consistent with the discussion of these orienta-
tions to work presented above. Both job involvement and intrinsic motiva-
tion were defined in terms of the effect of work on self esteem and posi-
tive self evaluations. People require the Opportunity to acquire self
esteem at work and certain types of work organizations allow this while
others do not.

It is not surprising to find that there was a strong relationship
between job involvement and authoritarianism since we would expect that if
a person was involved in their work, their desire to do a good job would be
self generated. Authoritarian forms of control are inconsistent with this
type Of work orientation since they are primarily designed to check the

behaviour of recalcitrant workers. In fact, this type of control is the

200

anathema of those workers with high job involvement since it refutes their
positive orientations to work.

When the relationship between autonomy and democratic supervision and
both job involvement and intrinsic motivation is examined, the positive
effects of work and the performance Of work can be seen. The person with
high intrinsic motivation scores defines good work performance as con-
tributing to self esteem. This is enhanced when the worker has the oppor-
tunity to use skills and abilities and exercise some judgements at work
which would be the case if autonomy or democratic supervision were high.
Both of these organizational factors are directed at the extent of control
that the employees exercise on their jobs. This ties this entire dis-
cussion in with our broader concerns over alienation and QWL. High autono-
my and high democratic supervision represent the type of work organization
in which the most positive results should exist. Their impact on these
orientations to work suggest that these may be enhanced if people are given
the chance to experience autonomy and to exercise some control over their
activity while at work.

Once again, these results point to the importance of the social
organization Of work. Autonomy and democratic supervision refer specif-
ically to the types of variables which the advocates of OWL point to in
their programmes for organizational change and work redesign. The positive
effects that these factors have on orientation to work is consistent with
their analysis Of the situation and is wholly anticipated by them.

The final set of tables which deal with job involvement and intrinsic
motivation, focus on the impact that these orientations have on work
behaviour. The results of a crosstabulation of these measures with those

dealing with worker behaviour are presented in Tables 24 and 25 below.

201

The relationship between job involvement and cooperation proved to be

moderate and positive with a Gamma of .3825. The table suggests that

cooperation is much higher when job involvement is high and low when job

involvement is low.

A moderate to strong and negative relationship was found to exist

TABLE 24:

Job
Involvement

High
Low

TABLE 25:

Intrinsic
Motivation

High
Low

Job Involvement by Worker Behaviour Measures.

(in percents)

Cooperation Confrontation

High Low High Low

73.4 25.7 43.4 56.6

56.4 43.6 65.3 34.7

N=208

Gamma = .3825 Gamma = -.4209
Chi Square = 6.6096 Chi Square = 9.0859
P = .01 P = .002

Intrinsic Motivation by Worker Behaviour Measures

(in percents)

Cooperation Confrontation
High Low High Low
82.1 27.9 50.0 50.0
56.6 43.4 55.4 44.6
N=208
Gamma = .5563 Gamma = -.1076
Chi Square = 12.9660 Chi Square = .3722

P .001 P = .54

202

between job involvement and confrontation. In this case the Gamma was
-.4209. Confrontation was found to be highest when job involvement was low
and lowest when job involvement was high.

The relationship between job involvement and cooperation can be
interpreted as a reflection of what it means to be involved in work. Thus
those employees who are highly involved in their jobs would be expected to
be cooperative, especially given the interpretation of this factor in the
present context, i.e., doing things above and beyond what is minimally
required. 0n the other hand, the relationship between job involvement and
confrontation shows that confrontation is highest when people are not
involved with their jobs. Theoretically, people low in Job Involvement
shouldn't care enough about their work to engage in Confrontation. Con-
versely, they may care so little that they are not concerned with the
possibility of losing their jobs.

This may be explained by the fact that people who care about their
work or who define it as an important part of their lives, may be looking
for ways to express this at work and may be willing therefore to engage in
behaviour which exceeds the minimum required. This extra effort can be
seen as a way to enhance the work experience on the part of these workers.
This type of behaviour would not be expected from someone who has little
self investment in work and who approaches work in an instrumental manner.
People who care about work, therefore, or who define it as being important
to their self esteem should be more likely to engage in cooperative behav-
iour when they define the job situation as favourable.

This is an important finding considering our theoretical framework and
the focus on alienation and QWL. In our discussion of alienation, work was

described as a major activity in people's lives. When work ceases to be

203

defined as an important facet Of life by working people, alienation re-
sults, in the sense that these people define their activities at work as
meaningless. Work becomes an instrumental activity for these people with
respect to need satisfaction. The implication here is that work should be
a meaningful pursuit both in the way that it contributes to a positive
image Of self and as a means of developing skills and powers in the course
of the satisfaction of human needs. It should be a way of life rather than
a way of making a living!

The results presented in Table 24 show that people who have withdrawn
their investments of self from work or who do not see their jobs as impor-
tant aspects Of their lives, may be willing to engage in confrontational
behaviour especially if they are not concerned with losing their jobs.
Those that define work as important, on the other hand, do in fact act to
maximize this through cooperation. This shows two types of responses that
people make towards work and demonstrates, to some extent, the nature of
the concept of alienation. The job involved person continues to evaluate
work positively and acts positively towards the situation. The person who
is not job involved may respond with confrontation when they care so little
about work that they are not concerned over loss of employment. Alterna-
tively, low job involvement may result in very instrumental responses at
work.

The relationship between intrinsic motivation and worker behavior
reiterates the findings in Table 24 with the exception that intrinsic
motivation is more directly related to the value that job performance has
for self esteem. This is clearly demonstrated in Table 25 which shows that
a strong, positive relationship exists between intrinsic motivation and

cooperation. The Gamma reported here .5563. In the table, 25.5% more

204

people with high motivation appeared in the high cooperation category than
in the low one. COOperation was low when intrinsic motivation was also
low.

The relationship between intrinsic motivation and confrontation was
found to be very slight and negative with a Gamma of -.1076. The associa-
tion was observed not to be statistically significant. While these vari—
ables do not appear to be strongly related, the direction of the relation-
ship suggests that confrontation is higher for those workers with low
intrinsic motivation. This follows the trend in the rest of this table and
that in Table 24 however the differences here were very small.

The findings in Table 25 can be interpreted as another indication of
how worker behaviour is affected by this particular orientation to work.
People who identify job performance in positive terms with respect to self
esteem, should be more willing to do things which go beyond the minimum
required by the job. Cooperation should be higher therefore for those
workers with high intrinsic motivation and the table indicates that this is
in fact the case. The findings with respect to confrontation however
warrant a different explanation. While the direction follows that de-
scribed for job involvement, the weak relationship here suggests that these
factors are not strongly related. Intrinsic motivation does not have much
of an impact on confrontation. The 10.9% difference in the cell fre-
quencies in the low confrontation category indicates that people with high
intrinsic motivation are slightly less likely to engage in this type of
behaviour. This may be related to the detrimental impact that confronta-
tion would have on a positive job performance evaluation. Thus high

intrinsic motivation is related to high cooperation and the avoidance Of

205

those types of activities at work which could result in negative evalua-
tions.

Workers with low intrinsic motivation may choose an instrumental
response in which they avoid confrontation in order to keep a low profile.
Alternatively, they may care so little about their jobs or job performance
that they are willing to engage in confrontational behaviour.

Worker behaviour therefore is related to both job involvement and
intrinsic motivation. Once again the formulations of the advocates of OWL
appear to be accurate with respect to the impact of positive orientations
to work on worker behaviour. These orientations were described above as
being related to the nature of the work organization and need satisfaction.
This was especially true for both authoritarianism and high order need
satisfaction.

The particular condition that people experience at work influences the
way they think about their jobs as well as the way they act at work. This
should be important to those people concerned with the design and redesign
of work since the factors found to be related to these attitudes and
behaviours are those which can be readily altered in work organizations.
This reflects both the concerns expressed in terms of alienation and QWL
since it focusses once again on the ability which people have to use skills
and abilities and to satisfy needs at work. It may be important to examine
these results more carefully when searching for forms of work organization
which contribute to OWL and which reduce alienation. The next section

deals specifically with organizational factors.

206

iv.) Organizational Factors.

This section of the study deals with the relationship between orga-
nizational factors and need satisfaction at work. In addition, the impact
that organizational factors have on worker behaviour will be examined. The
organizational factors being considered are measured in the Authoritar-
ianism, Autonomy and Democratic Supervision Scales.

When organizational factors were related to basic need satisfaction, a
small negative relationship was found to exist in the case Of authoritar-
ianism and a small positive one with democratic supervision. The Gamma's
Obtained here were -.1790 and .1405 respectively. These indicate that
basic need satisfaction is not affected very much by these particular
organizational factors. These relationships were not statistically signif-
icant. In the case of autonomy however, a strong, positive relationship
was discovered having a Gamma of .4390. This relationship was statistical-
ly significant at the .001 level. These relationships are presented in
Table 26, below. Table 26 shows that 22% more of the people who perceived
high levels of autonomy at work also indicated that they had high levels of
basic need satisfaction.

The relationship between organizational factors and the satisfaction
of social needs is presented in Table 27. The table indicates that a
moderate, negative relationship exists between social need satisfaction and
authoritarianism. The Gamma obtained here was -.2259 and Table 27 shows
that social need satisfaction was low when authoritarianism was high and
vice versa, although the differences across the categories were not large.
This association was found not to be statistically significant.

A similar result was found when the relationship between social need

satisfaction and autonomy was examined except that the relationship in this

207

case was positive. The Gamma which was Obtained here was .3431 and this

relationship was found to be statistically significant at the .01 level.

TABLE 26: Organizational Factors by Basic Need Satisfaction.
(in percents)

Authoritarianism Autonomy Democratic Supervision
High Low High Low High Low
Basic High 55.2 63.9 71.2 49l0 63.1 56.3
Need
Satis-
faction Low 44.8 36.1 28.8 51.0 36.9 43.7

Gamma = -.1790 Gamma = .4390 Gamma = .1405
Chi Square=1.2430 Chi Square=9.6256 Chi Square=.7264
P = .26 P = .001 P = .39

TABLE 27: Organizational Factors By Social Order Need Satisfaction.
(in percents)

Authoritarianism Autonomy Democratic Supervision
High Low High Low High Low
Social
Need High 42.4 53.8 57.3 39.6 64.1 32.4
Satis-
faction Low 57.6 46.2 42.7 60.4 35.9 67.6

Gamma = -.2259 Gamma = .3431 Gamma = .5771
Chi Square=2.1543 Chi Square=5.6917 Chi Square=19.4056
P = .14 P = .01 P .001

TABLE 28: Organizational Factors By Higher Order Need Satisfaction.
(in percents)

Authoritarianism Autonomy Democratic Supervision
High Low High Low High Low
Higher High 34.5 57.1 57.7 36.3 62.1 32.0
Order
Need
Satis-
faction Low 65.5 42.9 42.3 63.7 37.9 68.0
Gamma = .4339 Gamma = .4110 Gamma = .5536

Chi Square=9.4582 Chi Square=8.6408 Chi Square=17.5352
P = .002 P = .003 P .001

208

A strong positive relationship was discovered when social need satis-
faction was related to democratic supervision. The Gamma reported was
.5771 and Table 27 shows that 31% more respondents reported having high
social need satisfaction when democratic supervision was also high. The
reverse of this was also found to be true.

In all three instances therefore, social need satisfaction was influ-
enced by the organizational factors being examined however in the case of
authoritarianism, the relationship was not statistically significant.
Democratic supervision was observed as having the greatest effect on social
need satisfaction. This may be due to the ability of the residence super-
visors to promote or inhibit positive group relations. Scheduling has
already been mentioned as one way to facilitate group development. More-
over, the mood or tone of the unit or residence may reflect the orientation
that the residence supervisor dictates. Thus, cooperation may be en-
couraged or discouraged, depending on the approach favoured by the supervi-
sor, and this may be reflected in the assignment of particular tasks or in
the procedures set out for their accomplishment. In either case, the
supervisor appears to have a considerable impact on the degree of social
need satisfaction being reported by the Residential Counsellors.

The results of the crosstabulation of organizational factors and
higher order need satisfaction are reported in Table 28. The table shows
that higher order need satisfaction was strongly related to each of the
measures of organizational factors. Each of these will be dealt with in
turn.

When the relationship between higher order need satisfaction and
authoritarianism was examined, it was found to be strong and negative

having a Gamma of -.4339. Table 28 shows that higher order need satisfac-

209

tion was low when authoritarianism was high. A 22.6% difference was found
to exist across this category. Similarly results were obtained when the
relationship between higher order need satisfaction and autonomy was
examined. In this case the Gamma was .4110 indicating that the relation-
ship went in a positive direction. Thus, higher order need satisfaction
was high when autonomy was high and low when autonomy was low.

The relationship between higher order need satisfaction and democratic
supervision was also found to be strong and positive having a Gamma of
.5536. A difference Of almost 30% exists across the high, higher order
need satisfaction category, indicating that democratic supervision has a
large impact on this type of need satisfaction.

In general, the relationships between organizational factors and need
satisfaction was more pronounced for social and higher order need satisfac-
tion than it was for the satisfaction of basic needs. However, autonomy
was shown to have some influence in the case of basic need satisfaction.
The impact of democratic supervision on both social and higher order need
satisfaction suggests that these workers experience the organizational
structure largely as it relates to their interaction with their superiors
at work. In this case, the actions of the supervisory staff in encouraging
the types of activities described as democratic supervision, represent
precisely those activities which allow these workers to use their talents
and to be creative. This permits them to bring more to their jobs than
simply their physiological abilities. This is the way in which higher
order needs were described in our discussion above in terms of both aliena-
tion and QWL and the relationships outlined in Tables 26, 27 and 28 fully
support the types of responses which this discussion anticipates. Higher

order needs should be satisfied more often when people have the opportunity

210

to exercise some control over their work activity and especially when this
consists of using creative skills and talents.

This set of tables outlined the relationships between organizational
factors and need satisfaction. The next set focus on the impact that the
various organizational factors have on worker behaviour. The crosstabu-
lations of the organizational factors and the cooperation and confrontation

scales are displayed in Tables 29 and 30 below.

TABLE 29: Organizational Factors by Cooperation.
(in percents)

Authoritarianism Autonomy Democratic Supervision
Cooperation High Low High Low High Low
High 59.3 72.3 75.0 58.4 77.7 55.3
Low 40.7 27.7 25.0 4l.6 22.3 44.7
Gamma = -.2827 Gamma = .3621 Gamma = .4765

Chi Square=3.2240 Chi Square=5.6310 Chi Square=10.5473
P = .07 P = .01 P = .001

TABLE 30: Organizational Factors By Confrontation.
(in percents)

Authoritarianism Autonomy Democratic Supervision
Confronta- High Low High Low High Low
tion
High 73.6 39.5 46.2 60.8 47.6 59.6
Low 26.4 60.5 53.8 39.2 52.4 40.4

Gamma = .6199 Gamma = -.2870 Gamma = -.2386
Chi Square=22.1218 Chi Square=3.8610 Chi Square=2.5529
P .001 P = .05 P = .11
In Table 29 the relationship between authoritarianism and cooperation
was shown to be a moderate and negative one having a Gamma of -.2827. The
table indicates that 13% more workers had low cooperation scores when

authoritarianism was high. This relationship, however, was significant

only at the .07 level. The relationship between autonomy and cooperation

211

was also found to be moderately strong however in this case it was statis-
tically significant. The Gamma reported here was .3621. Cooperation was
found to be high when autonomy scores were high.

The relationship between cooperation and democratic supervision was
the strongest of the three outlined in this table, having a Gamma of .4765
and being statistically significant at the .001 level. The table shows
22.4% more people were in the high cooperation category when autonomy was
also high. Autonomy has a clear impact on cooperation in this case.

In Table 30, the organizational factors are related to confrontation.
The first part of this table shows that there is a very strong and positive
relationship between authoritarianism and confrontation. The Gamma ob-
tained here was .6199. There were 34.1% more respondents in the high
confrontation category when authoritarianism was high than when it was low.
This difference is quite large, indicating that authoritarianism has a
marked impact on this type of behaviour.

When the relationship between confrontation and autonomy was examined
it was found to be moderate and negative. The Gamma obtained in this case
was -.2873. The table shows that confrontation is higher when autonomy is
low with the difference across this category being 14.6%. While this
difference is not excessively large, the relationship was statistically
significant it does reflect the trend demonstrated throughout the table.

The last part of the table outlines the relationship between confron-
tation and democratic supervision. In this case, the relationship was also
moderate and negative having a Gamma Of -.2386. However, it was not
statistically significant. The table shows that confrontation was high
when democratic supervision was low. The difference here was 12.0% which

is not very large although it also reflects the trend evident in the rest

212

of the table.

The particularly strong, negative relationship presented in Table 30
with respect to the relationship between confrontation and authoritarianism
is consistent with our discussion above. This form of control was de-
scribed as being inappropriate for use with young, highly educated, white
collar employees. These workers indicated that they respond hostilely to
this approach by the administration and become involved in behaviour which
directly challenges the authority of their superiors. The trends presented
in the other two parts of this table support these results suggesting that
these workers are much less likely to engage in confrontational behaviour
when they are given the Opportunity to exercise some control over their
work. This is exactly what white collar jobs are supposed to have and the
responses of these workers show that they are unwilling to accept author-
itarian practices at work without opposition. These results also echo our
discussion Of alienation which described workers behaviour taken as resis-
tance to certain forms of control. The examples of the struggles against

"Scientific Management" are a case in point.

v) The Residential Units.

In this section Of the report, the differences which exist in the
response patterns of the four residential units in the facility will be
examined. This will include a consideration of organizational factors, the
satisfaction of needs and the attitudes and orientations that the workers
in the various residential units have. In our description of the various
residential units, we pointed out some of the factors which make working in
the various units different from each other. The impact that these differ-

ences have on the attitudes and behaviour of the residential staff allows

213

us a closer examination of the factors responsible for this and aids in our
understanding of this interaction. The four residences will be referred to
in this section as i) East Unit, ii) West Unit, iii) Nursing Unit, and
iv) Special Unit for convenience, although the Nursing Unit includes the
Developmental section and the Special Unit encompasses Behaviour Modifica-
tion according to our description above.

The first three tables presented in this section outline the frequency
distributions of the organizational factors across the four residential
units. These include authoritarianism, autonomy and democratic super-

vision. These are presented in Tables 31, 32 and 33 below.

TABLE 31: Frequency Distribution of Authoritarianism in the
Four Residential Units. (in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Authoritarianism
High 54.2 40.4 29.0 47.4
Low 45.8 59.6 7l.0 52.6

TABLE 32: Frequency Distribution of Autonomy in the Four Residential
Units. (in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Autonomy
High 42.4 46.8 55.6 59.5
Low 57.6 53.2 44.4 40.5

TABLE 33: Frequency Distribution of Democratic Supervision in the Four
Residential Units. (in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Democratic Supervision
High 40.7 63.8 48.4 48.6
Low 59.3 36.2 51.6 51.4

214

In Table 31, the frequency distribution of the perception Of Author-
itarianism by the residential staff in each of the four units is displayed.
It is clear from this table that there is a sizeable difference in the
perception of authoritarianism by the people working in the various units.
Thus, 71% of the staff in the nursing unit and almost 60% of the staff in
the West Unit perceive authoritarianism to be low. Only 45.8% of the
workers in East Unit and 52.6% in the Special Unit report low authoritar-
ianism. The differences here are quite large and this may be important in
interpreting the results of the other tables in this section and in the
report in general. This should be most evident when the individual resi-
dences are examined in terms of the existence of particular orientations to
work and with regard to the types of behaviours that the workers in each of
the units participates in. This will be expanded upon later in this
section.

The frequency distribution of the perception of Autonomy by the staff
in each Of the four residential units is presented in Table 32. This
distribution suggests that the staff in the Special Unit and in Nursing
perceive the most autonomy in their work. East unit reported the lowest
levels of autonomy.

Table 33 outlines the frequency distribution of the perceptions of
democratic supervision within each Of the four residential units. The
table indicates that a larger percentage of the staff in West unit per-
ceives high levels of democratic supervision than in any of the other
three units. Some of the information acquired in the discussion held with
our contacts working at the Centre, may account for the results described

in Table 33 as well as those in Tables 31 and 32.

215

The four Unit Supervisors in the facility, each had a different
approach to their jobs. The supervisor in the West Unit, for example, had
a reputation Of being very democratic but of also being quite demanding Of
the staff in the unit. This may account for the higher democratic super-
vision scores reported by the workers in West Unit. 0n the other hand, the
supervisor of East Unit was widely described in the Centre as a disci-
plinarian and this is reflected in the high scores that the staff members
in this unit reported on the authoritarianism measures. In both cases, the
organizational factor in question reflects the perceptions of the staff, of
their immediate job rather than their appraisals of these factors for the
Centre as a whole. However, this may be the result of the ability of the
staff in both the Nursing and Special Units to exercise more autonomy in
their jobs. These workers would have no reason to define their immediate
work situation in negative terms with respect to authoritarianism since
they do not experience this at the hands Of their immediate supervisors.
Similarly, the autonomy they experience at work may be based on the nature
Of the job itself and not on the particular actions of the immediate unit
supervisor. Therefore, these workers could report both high autonomy and
moderate democratic supervision scores since their jobs require autonomous
action yet the organization, through the supervisor, requires them to yield
to certain rules, and procedures.

The overall picture which emerges, based on the results of these three
tables, is one which highlights the different character of the four res-
idential units. The Nursing and Special Units have work routines which
require more freedom and latitude than those of the other residential

units. West unit appears to be strongly influenced by the orientation of

216

their residence supervisor. East unit experiences a similar influence but
in this case, the staff described it in negative terms. The make-up of the
client population in East unit may be a contributing factor in the orien-
tation which exists there. Recall that the most difficult clients to deal
with are housed in this unit and this could lead to a potentially serious
situation if the staff on the unit let matters get out of control. An
interesting result of this analysis is the way that the perceptions of the
RC staff concerning the organizational factors, affect both their attitudi-
nal and behavioural responses to work. Their perceptions of need satisfac-
tion should also be related to this. The next set of tables deals with the
frequency distributions of the need satisfaction measures in each of the

four units.

TABLE 34: Frequency Distribution of Basic Need Satisfaction
in the Four Residential Units. (in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Basic Need Satisfaction
High 52.5 66.0 58.7 65.8
Low 47.5 34.0 41.3 34.2

TABLE 35: Frequency Distribution of Social Need Satisfaction in the
Four Residential Units. (in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Social Need Satisfaction
High 36.2 61.7 46.9 54.1
Low 63.8 38.3 53.1 45.9

TABLE 36: Frequency Distribution of Higher Order Need Satisfaction
in the Four Residential Units. (in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Higher Order Need
Satisfaction High 47.5 34.0 52.4 55.3
Low 52.5 66.0 47.6 44.7

217

The distribution of need satisfaction scores among the four residen-
tial units presents some interesting findings. In Tables 34, 35 and 36,
the responses Of the staff in each of the units to the items measuring
basic, social and higher order needs are outlined. The tables show that
there is little difference in the way that the staff in each of the units
perceives basic need satisfaction. In all four cases a consistently high
positive response appears. The satisfaction of social needs however
reflects some differences between the units. In this case, West unit has a
25.5% higher score than East unit on social need satisfaction. It is also
higher than either the Nursing or Special unit however the percentage
differences here are 14.6 and 7.6 respectively. This situation is reversed
when higher order need satisfaction is examined since the West unit is the
one with the lowest scores in the high category of this measure. There is
little difference between the other three units in their higher order need
satisfaction scores but the order Of their ascendancy on the high category
shows Special units as highest followed by Nursing and then East.

An explanation of the results shown in these three tables may be based
on the particular orientation that these workers have towards their jobs.
In the case of the West unit employees in particular, the high basic and
social need satisfaction scores coupled with the low scores on higher order
need satisfaction suggests that these workers may have an instrumental
approach to work. If this is the case, their response to work orientation
measures should show that they do not place much value in their work roles
in terms of their own self identity and measures of self esteem. Their
jobs provide them with material and social benefits but not higher order

need satisfaction.

218

The situation is much different for both the staff in the Nursing and
Special units. In these units, basic needs are seen as satisfied and
relatively high scores were also reported for both social and higher order
need satisfaction. These scores were not significantly higher however than
those reported in the other two units. The pattern Of response here shows
that Special units usually had the highest need satisfaction scores,
followed by the Nursing Unit. Both of these units should report positive
scores on work orientation and worker behaviour if our analysis is correct.

The results found for East unit with respect to need satisfaction
indicate that the workers in this unit perceive the least amount of need
satisfaction of all the units. Their corresponding orientations to work
and worker behaviour measures should therefore be the most negative or
instrumental of the entire group. These comparisons can be made when the
frequency distribution of these items are examined and it is to this task
that we now turn.

The frequency distributions for job involvement and intrinsic motiva-
tion among the four units are presented in Tables 37 and 38 below. The
frequency distribution for the morale scores for the residences is given in
Table 39

The patterns anticipated above do occur to some extent in the results
shown in Tables 37 and 38. The job involvement and intrinsic motivation
scores of the staff in West unit suggest that these workers do not place a
great deal of value on work or on the self esteem which positive job
performance can provide. In both cases, West unit ranks second lowest in
terms of positive scores on these measures although the differences between

units on the job involvement scores is not large. They do have a very low

219

TABLE 37: Frequency Distribution for Job Involvement in the
Four Residential Units. (in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Job High 42.4 46.8 75.0 47.4
Involve-
ment Low 57.6 53.2 25.0 52.6

TABLE 38: Frequency Distribution for Intrinsic Motivation in the
Four Residential Units. (in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Intrinsic High 24.4 29.8 40.6 50.0
Motivation Low 67.8 70.2 59.4 50.0

TABLE 39: Frequency Distribution for Morale in the Four
Residential Units. (in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Morale High 40.7 44.7 62.9 51.4
Low 59.3 55.3 37.1 48.6

score on intrinsic motivation though, such that only 29.8% of these workers
report high intrinsic motivation. In our discussion above, we suggested
that since basic and social needs were perceived as fulfilled by this group
while higher order needs were not, that work would take on an instrumental
orientation. This low intrinsic motivation score shows that self esteem is
not tied into job performance for these workers and it may well be that
work is a place for them to fulfill material and social needs only.

The workers in East unit report the lowest scores on both job involve-
ment and intrinsic motivation. These were also the workers who ranked last
among the units on measures of need satisfaction, highest on authoritar-

ianism and lowest on both autonomy and democratic supervision. In terms

220

of our theoretical discussion above, these may be the most alienated
workers as well as the ones with the poorest QWL. Their score on the
morale scale which is presented in Table 39, suggests that they are also
the lowest on morale. This score is not significantly lower than those Of
the workers in the other units however with the exception of those in
Nursing. Therefore, some of these workers are satisfied with jobs which
they define as having little value. This is not a totally instrumental
response either however since these workers were not the highest on the
basic need satisfaction measures, suggesting that it is not only material
benefits which keeps these people here. Some of these workers do define
work in terms of its impact on self esteem but it appears that not many
relate positive job performance to this. If our analysis is correct, some
of these workers should be the least cooperative and most confrontational
workers in the Centre. This will be expanded upon in our discussion of
Tables 40 and 41 below.

The results presented in Tables 37, 38 and 39 show that he staff in
the Nursing unit is especially involved in their work. Their score on the
job involvement measure was 75% in the high job involvement category, which
was much higher than scores reported for the other three units. These
averaged only approximately 45%. This unit also had 40% of its staff
report high intrinsic motivation and while this percentage is not high in
absolute terms, the nursing unit staff did rank above both East and West
units on this measure. The staff in the Nursing unit also reported the
highest positive scores on the measure of morale at the Centre.

Special unit staff were not a great deal higher in their job involve-
ment scores than were either East or West units however, they did post the

highest score in the intrinsic motivation category. This was not high in

221

absolute terms being only 50% in the high category Of this measure. The
measure of morale in Table 39 indicates that these workers scored higher
than East and West Units again but that only 51.4% of the Special unit
staff said that morale was high at the Centre. These results suggest that
there is a degree of variability in the response pattern of the staff in
the Special Unit.

The distribution Of organizational factors and need satisfaction
scores among the staff members in the four residential units has had an
impact on the orientation that these workers have towards work. The next
set of tables outlines the distributions on self reported behaviour mea-

sures. These are presented in Tables 40 and 41 below.

TABLE 40: Frequency Distribution for Cooperation in the

Four Residential Units. (in percents)

' East West Nursing Special
Cooperation
High 57.6 76.6 75.0 51.4
Low 42.4 23.4 25.0 48.6

TABLE 41: Frequency Distribution for Confrontation in the

Four Residential Units. (in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Confrontation
High 71.2 53.2 34.4 57.9
Low 28.8 46.8 65.6 42.1

222

The difference found in the cooperation scores between the four
residential units was quite large and runs contrary to the findings antic-
ipated above. West unit had the highest score in the high cooperation
category Of 76.6% followed by 75% in this category by the staff in the
Nursing unit. While these strong positive responses were anticipated on
the part of the staff in the Nursing unit, it was not seen as a highly
probable result for the staff of West Unit since their scores on job
involvement and intrinsic motivation were low. The 29.8% score in the
positive category of intrinsic motivation, in particular, make these
results unusual, given the fact that this measure related positive job
performance to self esteem.

One plausible explanation for these results, which can be derived from
the data presented, is based on their high score on the measure of demo-
cratic supervision. The discussion given concerning this score related
information about the personal orientation to work transmitted to the unit
by the unit supervisor. It may be that the nature Of the work relation-
ships in this unit are affected to a large extent by this individuals'
ability to generate and encourage participation and cooperation. There is
little support for this behaviour on the basis of the other measures
discussed in this section with respect to these workers.

Another unanticipated finding in Table 40 was that the staff in
Special unit, reported the lowest positive cooperation scores of all.
Since they had been at or near the top on all previous positive measures,
we anticipated positive scores on the cooperation items and negative scores
on the confrontation ones. This was not the case in either measure since

they were also second highest in confrontational behaviour. One plausible

223

explanation for this is the range that the positive responses fall into.
For most items, this was usually around the 50% mark, suggesting that there
were many workers in the unit who did not share a common point of view.
This variability in response may account for the low cooperation score and
high confrontational behaviour.

The results in Tables 40 and 41 which deal with the response of the
East unit staff to these questions were the most consistent with our
analysis. These workers should have had the highest confrontational
behaviour according to their responses on the need satisfaction measures,
organizational factors and orientations to work described above. The
results show that this was in fact the case as 71.2% of these workers were
in the high confrontation category. This unit also had the second lowest
positive cooperation scores as well with 57.6% of these workers in the high
cooperation category. This amount Of cooperation is surprising however
considering their low scores on the intrinsic motivation measures.

A better understanding of the responses on these items may be gained
from an examination of the frequency distribution of various demographic
characteristics of the staff in the four units. The frequency distribu-
tions of the age, sex and length of employment in this particular job are
presented in Tables 42 and 43 below.

TABLE 42: Frequency Distribution of Age and Sex in the
Four Residential Units. (in percents)

24 and under 25 to 29 30 and over Male Female

East 32.3 33.9 33.8 31.5 68.5
West 34.0 27.7 38.3 11.4 88.6
Nursing 37.5 21.9 40.6 10.7 89.3

Special 44.8 44.7 10.5 15.2 84.5

224

TABLE 43: Frequency Distribution for Length of Employment at the
Centre for the Staff in the Four Residential Units.
(in percents)

Less than 5 years 5 to 10 years 10 years or more
East 51.0 28.8 20.2
West 63.8 25.5 10.6
Nursing 61.0 23.4 15.6
Special 81.6 15.8 2.6

The results of Tables 42 and 43 indicate that the staff in East and
West units was almost equally distributed across the three age categories.
More of the staff in the Nursing unit was 30 and over while 89.5% of the
staff in Special unit was under thirty. The distribution of sex among the
four units showed that the staff at the Centre was predominantly female
with approximately 85% of West, Special and Nursing units employees being
women. East Unit, on the other hand, had the highest percentage of men
totalling 31.5% of the staff in this unit.

The results in Table 43 also show some interesting patterns since the
staff in Special units had the least experience while the staff in East had
the most. West Unit and Nursing Unit had similar distributions with each
having approximately 65% of its staff working at the Centre for less than
five years.

Tables 42 and 43 present some findings which help to explain some of
the results discussed above. For example, both West unit and the Nursing
Unit have more staff in the over thirty category than the other two units.
With the exception of East unit, these two units also have the most experi-
enced staff of residential counsellors. These two factors may be con-
tributing to the high cooperation and low confrontation scores reported
here. This may also account for the low intrinsic motivation scores

reported by these two units since people at this stage in their careers may

225

be less concerned with the evaluations they get at work concerning their
performance, especially from younger and less experienced co-workers.

The situation in East unit may also be explained partially by these
results. TO begin with, more staff members in this unit are men, which may
account for the higher confrontation scores reported here. Additionally,
these workers have the most seniority of all the workers in the residential
units. This may account for both their low job involvement scores and low
intrinsic motivation scores since these workers may have accepted their
work situation for what it is and turned to other areas of life for self
identity and self esteem. This explanation would be consistent with our
theoretical discussion above. Two other measures may clarify this further.
These are the difficulty that these employees perceive in getting pro-
motions at the Centre and the extent to which they desire promotions. Both
of these items should reflect the orientations that the RC staff has
towards their jobs and perhaps the types Of behavioural response they are
more likely to engage in. These results are presented in Tables 44 and 45

below.

TABLE 44: Frequency Distribution for, "Difficulty in getting a promotion,"
Item for the Residential Staff in the Four Residential Units.

(in percent)

East West Nursing Special
Promotion
Very difficult
to get promoted 78.0 85.1 73.4 89.2

Not very difficult
to get promoted 22.0 14.9 26.6 10.8

226

TABLE 45: Frequency Distribution for, "How Important is a promotion,
to you," Item for the Staff in the Four Residential Units.
(in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Promotion important 39.0 44.7 51.6 51.4
Not very important 61.0 55.3 48.4 48.5

In Table 44, a strong consensus on the part of the staff in all four
units is Obvious. Between 73.4% and 89.2% of the staff indicate that
getting a promotion is very difficult. The unit with the lowest score here
was the Nursing unit whose staff is somewhat more qualified than the
regular RC's. The significance of the lack of upward mobility for the
staff is illustrated by the results of Table 45 which shows how many people
in each of the units defines getting a promotion as very important.

Table 45 shows that getting a promotion is important for slightly over
50% of the staff in both the Nursing and Special units. West unit has
44.7% Of the staff in this category, while East unit has only 39.0% here.
The low scores on both job involvement and intrinsic motivation measures
may once again be accounted for by the low scores in the West and East
units, in terms of their desiring a promotion. This is somewhat problemat-
ic however since the entire staff agree's that promotions are very diffi-
cult to receive at the Centre. Our informants suggested to us that there
was really no place for these employees to go except into management and
that the Centre had more supervisors in the residential units than it
needed. Therefore, there was no real incentive for these workers to aim
for. The only hope, outside of supervision for those that wanted to move
up, was a lateral transfer to another area of service. This was Often

difficult however since these positions required different training and

227

skills. The feeling gained in the interviews and in our informal conver-
sations with some of the staff members was that people felt locked into
their jobs, and in many cases saw little hope of getting out.

One final measure of behaviour is outlined in this section which can
be compared to the findings reported above. In this case, rules at the
Centre are the focus of attention and the staff was asked how closely the
rules were followed where they worked. The results of this item are
displayed in Table 46 below.

TABLE 46: Frequency Distribution for How Closely Are Rules Followed,

Item for the Staff in the Four Residential Units.
(in percents)

East West Nursing Special
Rules followed
closely 50.9 63.8 82.9 76.3
Not followed
closely 49.1 36.2 17.1 23.7

Table 46 presents the frequency distribution for the item asking how
closely rules are followed by the staff. The table suggests that rules are
followed very closely in both the Nursing and Special units and less
closely in the other two units. A partial explanation for this rests on
the work routines followed in each of the four units. Nursing, for exam-
ple, is involved much more frequently in medical routines including drug
dispensing which requires these staff members to follow precise procedures.

Similarly, the staff in the Special Unit deals with sensory impaired
individuals who are often being taught to function independently.
Routine and regularity is one way of ensuring that this is possible,
especially with the visually impaired people who depend on items being

located in a particular area or stored in the same place all the time.

mm.i
mo.i
mH.

OH.
NH.
cm.

:o_mw>ema:m
uppmeuoEmo

0H.
0H.
mm.

mm.
co.
NH.

“v.1
«0.-
mH.u

xeocou3<

ow.
ov.1
me.1

Hm.-
mo.-
mH.-

mH.
ma.
mm.

Emwcmwcm
-p_co;u=<

mH.-
mH.u
mm.1

m—ocoz

um. o“.
hm. mo.
mv. mm.
on. mH.
mo. mH.
om. mm.
no.1 oo.
oo.. mo.
mm.. 00..
acme corp
-m>po>:H im>puox

now Ommcwepcm

oH.
oH.
om.

NH.
«H.
mm.

NH.-
NH.1
mm.u

Lmuco
enema:

en. om.i
no. No.1
mH. mo.
cm. Hm.
mo. mo.
ma. mo.
mm. mm.1
moo. no.1
mH.i o~.a

Fwwuom owmmm

mnmo.m womnz

p

upwm

mm—amwgm> umumpmg now

now: cowuopmcgou gmueo ocmN

m4<moz

mm~m.nm momnz

a

mumm

mmpamwcm> umumpmc non

epwz cowumpmeeou emcee ocmN

onh<mwaoou

owm¢.um momnz

a

mumm

mmpnmmcm> ummeme non

cup: cowpmpmecou gouge oLON

onH<pzommzou

.mmramwcm> umumpwm now co mmcammmz mpmgoz ecu Laow>mgom cmxgoz mo commmmgmmm mpqwupaz ”Ne uqm<p

228

NO such requirements affect the staff in the other two units and this may
account for some Of the higher incidence of rule breaking behaviour
reported by them.

It is interesting however, to note the rank order of the four units in
terms of this item. East unit had the highest score in this category
followed by West, Special and Nursing. Again, the age and experience of
the staff in East unit may offer some explanation for these results.
However, the order of appearance on this "negative" behavioural measure
remains consistent with those reported above. East unit reported the
highest participation scores in terms of confrontation and lack of coop-

eration.

VI: The Relationship Between Major Variables.

A Multiple Regression analysis was carried out which identified the
\worker behaviour measures and morale as dependent variables and the need
satisfaction, orientation to work and organizational factors as independent
variables. The results of this procedure are presented in Table 47 below.

A forward step-wise inclusion procedure was employed in this case in
order to determine the explanatory power that the various independent
variables contributed to the overall explained variance. The parameters
established for inclusion in the equation are set very broadly in order to
ensure maximum inclusion which facilitates a comparison of the relative
EXplanatory power contributed by each of these variables to the regression
equation. The variables included were the key independent variables in the
Study.

The R value reported for confrontation in Table 47 was .4320 and .3788

for cooperation. Neither of these values for R is excessively high

considering the number of independent variables included in the equation.
In the case of morale, an R value of .6278 was found suggesting that the

variables included in the analysis do account for a substantial amount of
the variation in the morale scores.

The b values reported in this table are partial regression coeffi-
cients and may be used as a measure of the influence of each independent
variable on the dependent variable with adjustments made for all other
independent variables. The other independent variables in this usage are
understood to be controlled statistically. The interpretation of b then
suggests the unit change in the dependent variables for each unit increase
in the independent variable being examined when the effects of all the
other independent variables which appear in the equation are controlled
statistically.

Table 47 presents some interesting findings with respect to the
occurrence of confrontational behaviour. The b values reported indicate
that basic need satisfaction has a dampening effect on confrontation such
that as basic need satisfaction increases, confrontation decreases. The
same is true in the case of job involvement and autonomy although the b
reported for basic need satisfaction and job involvement was -.58 and -.63
respectively while it was only -.47 for autonomy.

The opposite effect is found with respect to social need satisfaction
which had a b of .68 and was the largest b reported in this section of the
table. This was also true of intrinsic motivation which recorded a b of
.60. The rest of the b values reported in this section of the table were
much smaller.

These results suggest that confrontation is more likely when people

perceive group support for their behaviour which is the case when social

230

needs are being met. Similarly, the high b value obtained for intrinsic
motivation is consistent with our analysis in the sense that the person who
is intrinsically motivated defines work as important to self esteem espe-
cially as this is related to performance. The table indicates that
confrontation increases by .60 units per unit increase in intrinsic mo-
tivation. The composition of the confrontation items was based on the
willingness Of the worker to challenge their superiors at work. The
results Obtained here may show that those persons who are concerned with
their jobs in this particular way, may be unwilling to accept jobs which do
not provide for self esteem or where recognition of performance may not be
forthcoming. This is somewhat the opposite of our discussion about the
relationship between intrinsic motivation and confrontation above which
pointed out that confrontational behaviour was most prevalent in those
units with the lowest intrinsic motivation scores. The findings reported
in this table show that intrinsic motivation may also be operating in an
opposite way to instrumentalism therefore since it is intrinsic motivation
which is positively related to confrontation. The intrinsically motivated
employee is not the one who responds instrumentally because he/she cares
about work.

The interpretation of the Beta values permits an assessment Of the
relative importance of each independent variable on the dependent variable.
The Beta values in this case represent the standardized regression coeffi-
cients and their interpretation is that the Beta value represents the
number Of standard deviation units of change in the dependent variable that
would be predicted by changes in one standard deviation unit in the in-
dependent variable in question. In Table 47, morale appears to have the

largest negative effect on confrontation i.e., reducing the amount of

231

confrontation, while authoritarianism has the largest positive one.

These results are consistent with our analysis since they point out
how morale can reduce confrontation while authoritarianism increases it.

In our discussion, workers' attitudes were related to their behaviour by
the advocates of OWL while confrontation was referred to in our considera-
tion of control over workers and alienation.

The second part of Table 47 outlines the regression analysis with
cooperation being entered into the equation as the dependent variable. The
table shows that higher order need satisfaction, intrinsic motivation, job
involvement and democratic supervision are most related to cooperation on
the basis of the zero order correlations, however none of these relation-
ships are very strong. The 6 values reported in this section of the table
indicate that job involvement and social need satisfaction are most posi-
tively associated with positive changes in cooperation while authoritar-
ianism is most strongly associated with negative changes.

The Beta values here point out that higher order need satisfaction,
intrinsic motivation and democratic supervision would result in the largest
unit increase in cooperation for each standard deviation unit of change in
these independent variables. While these changes would not be large, the
items included here reflect the impact that the satisfaction of self
related needs has for the enhancement Of positive behaviour by workers.
This is precisely what can be inferred from our discussion of alienation
and is made explicit by the proponents of OWL.

The final section of this table incorporates morale as the independent
variable in the regression equation. The R score reported in this case was
the largest of the three indicating that morale is most related to the

independent variables under examination. The zero order correlations

232

reported in this section of the table show that job involvement is most
positively related to morale having a correlation of .43, while author-
itarianism is most negatively related to morale. The correlation reported
in this case was -.49. The remaining zero order correlates in this section
of the table were either low or moderate.

The b values obtained with morale as dependent indicate that social
need satisfaction has the largest positive effect on morale while author-
itarianism and democratic supervision has the largest negative effect. The
b values obtained here were .74 and -.40 and -.82 respectively. It is
clearly understandable that social need satisfaction has a strong and
positive impact on morale considering the importance of the work groups in
the institution's day to day routines. Conversely, the negative response
of these people to authoritarianism has emerged a number of times in this
study and demonstrates the inappropriateness of this form of control on
these workers. The findings with respect to democratic supervision however
are much more difficult to understand. Throughout this report, this
measure has been identified in positive terms with respect to workers'
attitudes and behaviour. In this case, it indicates a large per unit
change in morale but this change would go in a negative direction. The
only plausible explanation here is that the highly job involved person
would be interested in being identified and singled out for his or her work
role and this is inhibited by a cooperative, democratic work environment,
especially if this is being promoted in this fashion by the supervisor.

The standardized regression coefficients in this section of the table
indicate that job involvement has the largest positive effect on morale
while authoritarianism has the largest negative effect. Job involvement is

followed in order of importance by higher order need satisfaction and

233

intrinsic motivation. The latter reinforces the importance that work has
for people in terms of self identity and self esteem while the former
provides the vehicle for this type of expression at work. It is not
surprising therefore, to find these three measures appearing in this way.
In the case of authoritarianism, its negative impact has been consistent
and fully anticipated.

The results presented in Table 47 support our discussions above in a
number of ways. The attitudes and behaviours of these workers were shown
to be related in ways which is consistent with our theoretical framework
and the analysis of the present research site. Authoritarianism in partic-
ular reflects the situation which exists at the Centre among this specific
group Of workers with regard to attitudes and behaviour. This justifies
our selection of these workers since they are representative of the new,
better educated workers in the service sector of the economy.

A Multiple Regression analysis similar to that presented above was
carried out for the need satisfaction measures. The results of this
analysis are outlined in Table 48 below.

Table 48 shows that the R scores obtained were low to moderate for
basic and social need satisfaction and strong for higher order need satis-
faction. These were .2559, .3338 and .4666 respectively. The zero order
correlations reported in this table suggest that basic need satisfaction is
most closely related to autonomy while social need satisfaction is most
closely related to democratic supervision. In the case of higher order
need satisfaction, four measures were found to be almost equal in the zero
order correlations at the .29 level. These included intrinsic motivation,
job involvement, morale and democratic supervision. A -.20 correlation was

found here with authoritarianism which was the largest negative score

234

reported.

The largest Beta value Obtained in the portion of the table in which
basic need satisfaction scores were displayed was .21 in the autonomy
category. For social need this was .28 for democratic supervision while
in the case of higher order need satisfaction a b value of .19 was obtained
in the democratic supervision category and one of .17 was found with
intrinsic motivation.

The b values presented in the table with respect to basic need satis-
faction indicate that social need satisfaction would result in the largest
positive change here. Higher order need satisfaction, intrinsic motivation
morale and authoritarianism resulted in negative b values which ranged from
-.44 to -.53, indicating negative change. Social need satisfaction, on the
other hand, was most positively affected by basic need satisfaction and
autonomy. The measures with the largest negative impact according to
these b scores were higher order need satisfaction and job involvement.
When higher order need satisfaction was examined, autonomy was found to
have the largest positive impact while basic and social need satisfaction
and authoritarianism had the largest negative effect.

The results presented in this table, especially those related to the b
values reported, demonstrate some interesting findings. Basic need satis-
faction for example, appears to be positively related to social need
satisfaction but negatively related to higher order need satisfaction.
Similar results are reported for social need satisfaction which show that
it is positively related to basic need satisfaction but also negatively
related to higher order need satisfaction. This pattern has been evident
in a number of tables presented above and suggests that basic and social

needs differ quite substantially from higher order needs. These three

235

measures appear to be responsive to different factors as well. The large b
value Obtained in the autonomy category with respect to higher order need
satisfaction and the negative values recorded for basic and social need
satisfaction in this case, give an indication of the nature of this pat-
tern. Higher order needs are positively affected by the opportunities that
these workers perceive for the expression of skills and abilities at work
which reflect their self related needs. Basic and social needs on the
other hand are more immediate and in a sense, compensatory. They may be
pointing to the lack of desire or perceived opportunity for self needs to
be fulfilled on the part of some workers. The only exception here is the
.60 b value recorded in the autonomy category of the social need satisfac-
tion section of the table. The rest of the scores follow our analysis
including the results obtained in all three parts of this table with
respect to job involvement and intrinsic motivation.

It may be that either these workers accept that basic and social needs
are being or will be met at work or; that basic and social need satisfac-
tion is more of a concern for workers with instrumental orientations to
work as Opposed to workers with orientations which seek the satisfaction of
higher order needs here. The importance that higher order need satisfac-
tion was found to have on positive the behavioural and attitudinal re-
sponses of these workers suggests that alienation and QWL based analysis,
such as the one presented here, warrant careful consideration when the
nature and form of work are discussed. The proponents of OWL in particular
appear to be focussing on the factors in the work environment which con-
tribute to positive attitudes and behaviours at work and which also address
the satisfaction of higher order needs. These are also the needs which

must be fulfilled through work according to our analysis of alienation.

236

CHAPTER FIVE

Discussion and Conclusion

 

"On the surface it looks like a fair bargain; do this for that; means
employed to a given end - nothing in sum, that any organism in nature does
not undergo. This is not creative fashioning of experience in order to
attain a given end. Instead, there is a long duration of dead time and
dead effort - merely a barter toward the end desired. The individual "puts
in time" in order to get a wage. Seen from the point Of view of the acting
organism, the period of wage-work is a suspension of its own initiatory
powers. This is not to be compared to what looks like a similar process in
nature...

We began this study with a brief discussion of the tumultuous era Of
the late sixties and early seventies. At that time, many of the new,
young, well educated workers who were entering the economy for the first
time, were showing their discontent with work through their behavioural and
attitudinal responses to their jobs. So widespread was the problem Of work
that many government, business and labour leaders began to express grave
concerns over the effect of worker unrest on the economy. As a result, a
number of initiatives were undertaken to find some sort of resolution to
this problem. One such initiative lead to the publication of the Work In
America report in early 1972.

The authors of Work In America illustrated the severity of the problem
of work in their discussion and offered their assessment of the possible
causes of it. For example, they noted the influx of a whole new generation
of workers into the labour market who were untouched by the depression, and
who had been taught in the nation's schools to value freedom and democracy
in their lives. These same young people were woefully unprepared for the

authority and discipline they encountered in the large scale, rigid bureau-

cracies in which they worked. Since they were unafraid of the economic

237

consequences of being out of work, many demonstrated a less than inspired
attitude toward their jobs. This lead many commentators to suggest that
the work ethic in America was dead.

A second cause Of the problem described in the Work In America report
was based on the anachronistic nature of Taylorism and Scientific Manage-
ment as a form of work place organization. The fragmentation which work
suffered under this system was becoming increasingly unacceptable to
workers who were unwilling to work under this type of control. The mind-
less, boring, repetitive jobs which are typical of assembly line work,
render calculations of efficiency solely on quantity of output and ignore
the social costs incurred in doing this type of work. It was becoming
obvious that sabotage, vandalism, absenteeism, labour turn over in addition
to more traditional forms of confrontational behaviour such as strikes and
grievances had to be factored into the ”efficiency of production" equation.
The costs of this type of behaviour were becoming more and more a part of
doing business. A technological solution to this problem, such as that
employed in the construction of General Motor's Lordstown Ohio assembly
plant showed that this merely aggravated an already bad situation. This
became clear when a series of violent confrontations erupted at this plant
shortly after it was opened. The technological solution ignored the social
aspects of the workplace organization and the consequences of this proved
costly!

The authors of Work In America pointed out one additional cause of the
problems at work. They noted the sharp decline in the number of people in
the United States who were working for themselves during this period of
America history and they posited a gloomy forecast for this type of employ-

ment in the future. The essence of this discussion is that fewer and fewer

238

people in the country would have the Opportunity to be their own bosses and
work for themselves. The alternatives of this type of work, once so
prominent in this country, was working in a large, faceless, heartless
bureaucracy in which most people have little or no control over what they
do at work. The ramifications of this are quite serious. Some of them are
pointed out by the advocates of the quality of working life movement which
began to develOp during this time. Others are depicted in the concept of
alienation. In fact, alienation became the watchword during this era,
being applied to a whole range of human experiences and capturing the
spirit of the period. People began to recognize that they were strangers
to themselves and their own work.

Control over work is both the entrance into this complex topic as well
as the corridor linking it to the disparate conceptualization which we
employed in our analysis. In Work In America, the consequences of
Tayloristic methods of workplace organization were clearly spelled out.
Jobs which were rigidly controlled, minutely divided and which offered the
incumbent little opportunity to use talents and skills were no longer
passively accepted. The inherent costs of these types of jobs had to be
taken into account. The QWL movement seized on this notion and began to
examine alternative methods for organizing production. Unlike Mayo and
many of his followers, many of the new QWL advocates were concerned with
substantially more than simply enhancing or encouraging good relations with
workers and employers. They began to recognize the importance that control
over work had.

A number of studies conducted during this time demonstrated the
negative impact that mindless, boring jobs had, especially when people

exercised little control over their work. The OWL movement extended this

239

notion by suggesting that the costs of such a system of work organization
spread far beyond the workplace and affect society in a number of ways.
These 'social costs' include medical expenses, problems with mental health,
alcoholism as well as interpersonal problems such as family breakdowns and
violence. These people proposed that a better way of organizing production
be developed.

Studies during this period also indicated that there were a number of
advantages to be gained through the establishment of organizations which
encouraged workers to participate in decision making. The Japanese were
experiencing tremendous success with industrial relations which were based
on cooperation between management and labour rather than confrontation. In
addition, according to these theorists, it was patently wasteful to use
only the physical power of workers and not their mental and creative power
as well. With these types of ideas in mind, the QWL movement began to call
for the reorganization of work in a way which would enhance worker control
and avoid Tayloristic forms of work organization.

The ideas contained in this conceptualization of the QWL movement
especially with respect to the meaning of work in people's lives and the
control that they exercise over work, are the key ideas which link this to
the concept of alienation employed in this project. Based on the work of
Marx, alienation was described above as a structural condition in which
people have little or no control over the purpose, process or products Of
their work. The significance of this rests on the importance attached to
work in this conceptual system. For Marx, work represents the means
through which a people give meaning to life and make a living, both in the
simple physical sense of providing enough to stay alive and in the meta-

physical sense Of what it means to be human. Human beings therefore,

240

create and recreate themselves through the free and spontaneous exercise of
their human skills and abilities.

People are alienated when they lose control over their activity in
this sense, especially as this relates to the work process. In strictly
quantitative terms, we spend about one half of our waking hours either at
work or preparing for it. Given this situation, alienation means that you
do not have control over half of your life and what's more, this time and
activity does not exist for you as an Opportunity to satisfy human needs,
with the exception of the most basic needs for material existence. Work
which is organized according to Tayloristic principles in a Capitalist
society, maximizes the use Of physical power and deliberately enacts the
separation of mental and manual labour. Only the most basic of human
qualities and skills are utilized in this work process.

The satisfaction Of human needs becomes at once the means for elim-
inating alienation and/or enhancing OWL if these needs are satisfied
through the free expression of human powers and abilities. The extent to
which this occurs depends upon the organization of work. If this promotes
the satisfaction of increasingly higher human needs by affording people the
opportunity to use their skills and abilities then alienation will be low
since people will have control over their activity at work. QWL will be
enhanced under these circumstances as well since people will be able to
grow and develop at work and work will become a very positive part of their
lives.

The satisfaction of human needs is an explicit part of OWL programmes.
Advocates of this approach have drawn on the work of Abraham Maslow who
identified a 'hierarchy' Of human needs. This hierarchy included the

satisfaction of basic needs which revolve around food, shelter and clothing

241

or the material basis of life, in addition to higher order needs which deal
with self esteem and self actualization. This model makes it clear that
lower order needs have to be met before higher order ones are addressed.
The QWL construct identifies the satisfaction of higher order needs in this
manner as an indication of the quality that people actually experience in
their work lives.

Alienation and QWL are related in this study precisely on the basis Of
the extent of need satisfaction which control over work produces. The
opportunity which a particular work organization allows for control over
work and hence the satisfaction of increasingly higher order needs should
demonstrate the nature of both alienation and QWL being experienced by the
workers there. This notion underscores much of the present analysis. It
neither denies the existence of a Capitalist economy nor the potential
impact that the OWL movement can have. Instead it seeks to understand how
the relations found at work affect need satisfaction and thus both aliena-
tion and QWL. Clearly, some people exercise more control over their work
than others do in this society. If this conceptualization is correct,
these people should have the Opportunity to fulfill more higher order needs
through their work and therefore experience a higher quality Of working
life and 'less' alienation.

One of the proposed solutions to the problem of alienation which
emerged during the late 1960's and early 1970's was based on the promise
which white collar jobs offered. Unlike the dirty, heavy work in blue
collar occupations, white collar jobs were supposed to be ones in which the
occupant would be more than an extension of a machine and would be able to
exercise some discretion and control at work. The traditional professions

represented the models for these white collar jobs and the statistics

242

gathered on the labour market indicated that an increasingly larger propor-
tion of jobs were being created in the service sector of the economy were
comprised mainly of white collar jobs. A great deal of the country's
alienation problem would disappear as more and more jobs in the industrial
sector would be done by machines while people worked in Offices in white
collar jobs.

In our discussion above, the reality of many of the new white collar
jobs was described. The studies presented in this context indicated that
these jobs had little to Offer their incumbents in the way of control over
their work or the opportunity to satisfy their higher order needs. In
fact, many of these jobs began to resemble their blue collar counterparts
much more than they did the 'professional' model which they were supposedly
fashioned after. The workers selected for study in this project were ones
which most represented the qualifications and characteristics of this new
white collar segment of the labour market. We were interested in discover-
ing if these workers responded in ways different from or similar to people
in more traditional blue collar occupations.

Two sets of factors were considered in conjunction with our concep-
tualization of need satisfaction. These were the impact that various
organizational factors had and the role that orientation to work played in
the process of need satisfaction at work. These two sets of factors were
seen as being related to both the attitudinal and behavioural responses
that people make at work. A series of items designed to measure several
aspects of both of these factors were therefore included in this study.

The major components in this study then are alienation and QWL de-
scribed in terms of need satisfaction through control over work; orien-

tation to work; organizational factors; and measures of workers'

243

attitudes and self reports about their behaviour at work. Need satisfac-
tion included a consideration of basic, social and higher needs. Orienta-
tion to work was described as job involvement and intrinsic motivation.
The organizational factors which were included consisted of the workers
perceptions of authoritarianism, autonomy and democratic supervision.
Attitudinal and self reported behaviour were discussed in terms of workers
morale, cooperation and confrontation. The relationships which were found
to exist between these variables were described and elaborated upon in our
analysis.

The first set of relationships considered in the study involved those
which dealt with the satisfaction of needs. A considerable amount of
agreement was reported by the Residential Counselling staff with respect to
the high degree of satisfaction of both basic and social needs. In the
case of higher order needs, much more variability was noted in the re-
sponses. This is important in the present context since higher order needs
reflect the nature of control over work much more so than do either basic
or social need satisfaction. Basic needs refers to pay, security and
benefits, factors which are removed from the day to day work routines.
Social needs in this case, address the extent of positive interaction and
cooperation which goes on between workers on staff at the Centre. While
this is based on the organization of work to the extent that work groups
are created to accomplish specific tasks, the essence of social need
satisfaction may have more to do with the individuals involved than with
the work organization itself. Higher order needs, on the other hand, focus
on the extent to which skills and abilities are used on the job and the
opportunity which the job affords people to grow and develop through this

activity. This is based much more directly on the nature of the work

244

organization since it is this which dictates the degree of control that
these workers are able to exercise in the performance Of their duties.

The satisfaction of higher order needs was identified in our dis-
cussion as a means for maintaining a positive identity and enhancing one's
evaluations of self worth. If this type of situation was prevalent, this
should have been reflected in the orientations which people had toward
work. The two orientations examined in this case included job involvement
which addressed the significance which a person attached to work in terms
of its overall importance to self identity and self evaluation, and intrin-
sic motivation, which reflected the importance that a person attached to
job performance in terms of its contribution to self esteem.

The relationship between need satisfaction and orientation to work was
found to be consistent with our analysis of these factors. Thus, basic and
social need satisfaction were found to be only slightly to moderately
related to orientation to work. A strong and positive relationship however
was found to exist between higher order need satisfaction and both job
involvement and intrinsic motivation. This reflects the specific nature of
the items included in both our measures of higher order need satisfaction
and those in the job involvement and intrinsic motivation scales such that
the higher order need variables are in fact the ones which make a contribu-
tion to self identity and self esteem.

These findings echoed our discussion of both alienation and QWL since
both constructs were based on the necessity to satisfy higher order needs
at work. The fact that both job involvement and intrinsic motivation were
so strongly related to higher order need satisfaction reinforces these
particular concepts since it demonstrates the link between identity, self

esteem and work. What does it mean to a person if more than half of their

245

waking hours are spent in a pursuit which Offers no viable source of either
identity or self esteem. People can withdraw investments of themselves
from situations in which this occurs, however, this is precisely the point;
half of a person's life is rendered meaningless through this withdrawal.
What kind of 'quality' can exist for people under these circumstances?

What does alienation mean if it doesn't address the loss of this large a
portion of a person's life for satisfying these intrinsically human needs!
Work should be the major arena for doing this. When it is not, QWL suffers
and alienation abounds.

The need satisfaction items were crosstabulated with the measures Of
organizational factors in order to assess the relationship which existed
between them. The results of this procedure presented several interesting
findings. To begin with, the relationship between authoritarianism,
autonomy and democratic supervision and basic need satisfaction was found
to be low. This was anticipated by our discussion above since basic need
satisfaction was described as not being related to the day-tO-day work
routines which these organizational factors are based upon.

In the case of social and higher order needs, however, a much stronger
relationship was found to exist. This was positive in the case Of autonomy
and democratic supervision and negative with respect to authoritarianism.
The opportunity which work affords people for social and higher order need
satisfaction is influenced directly by the type of control which these
people are able to exercise at work. All three organizational factors
focus on this in one way or another.

The relationship between need satisfaction and the measure of people's
orientation to work proved to be quite strong. In the case of morale the

relationship ranged from moderate to strong, with higher order need

246

satisfaction being especially important to morale. Basic need satisfaction
had a moderate relationship here and while the one with social need satis-
faction was stronger, it was not as strong as that with higher order needs.

Similar results to these were Obtained when the relationship between
need satisfaction and intrinsic motivation and job involvement was ex-
amined. Basic and social need satisfaction were found to be moderately
related to job involvement while higher order need satisfaction was found
to have a strong relationship here. A strong positive relationship was
also found to exist between higher order need satisfaction and intrinsic
motivation. A slight negative relationship was found in this instance with
respect to basic need satisfaction and only a low one when social needs
were examined.

These results indicate once again that higher order need satisfaction
is much more closely related to the attitudes which people have about the
importance of their work experiences for the establishment and maintenance
of positive identities and for contributing to positive evaluations of self
worth. Basic and social need satisfaction were less related to this
process than were higher order needs. When higher order needs are sat-
isfied at work, the likelihood for positive orientations to work is greater
than when these needs are not being met. This suggests that the QWL
formulation has a great deal to tell us about how people think about work.
It may also indicate that there is a clear distinction between the impact
of basic and social need satisfaction and the satisfaction of higher order
needs on this situation. An instrumental orientation based on pay and
benefits etc. for example which does not stress involvement and motivation

may rest on a person's ability to satisfy basic needs at work. Being

247

involved in one's job or having intrinsic motivation may be based according
to our discussion above, on exercising control over work activity which is
related to the satisfaction of higher order needs. This provides one more
source of support for the QWL approach and our analysis of alienation.
Higher order need satisfaction is vital for positive orientation toward
work!

The culmination of the relationships discussed above was aimed at the
impact that these orientations and types of need satisfaction had on a
person's behavioural response to work. It was clear that need satisfaction
influenced the attitudes of these people. If this relationship continued
to hold, it should result in particular types of behavioural responses.

The findings obtained from a crosstabulation of the need satisfaction
measures and the workers' self reported behaviour indicated that such a
relationship did exist. While basic and social need satisfaction showed
only a slight to moderate relationship to the worker behaviour measures,
the relationship between worker behaviour and higher order need satisfac-
tion was found to be quite strong. This was true for both negative behav-
ioural expressions described in this report as confrontation as well as
positive ones described as cooperation.

Once again, these results lend a great deal of support to the con-
tentions of much of the OWL literature which suggests that people want more
than just a decent pay check from their jobs. The relationship between
need satisfaction and higher order need satisfaction in particular and
worker behaviour also shows that it will take more than simply higher
paychecks and better benefits to enhance worker behaviour on the job. This
is implied in both the OWL concept and the concept of alienation. People

do want more out of their work!

248

The remaining parts of our analysis explored the relationships between
the organizational factors and the measures of workers' orientations to
work. These in turn were all related to the behavioural responses Of
people at work. In most instances, the basic relationships described above
with respect to the need satisfaction measures continued to hold. There-
fore, a strong relationship was anticipated between orientation to work and
worker behaviour. The results obtained showed that morale and job involve-
ment were moderately related to both positive and negative behavioural
expressions while intrinsic motivation was related strongly only to the
measure of cooperation. This was understandable given the performance
component of this concept.

The orientations which people had to work were affected by the orga-
nizational factors in much the same way as the need satisfaction measures
were. Thus, morale was very strongly and negatively related to author-
itarianism while a moderate, positive relationship was found with respect
to autonomy and democratic supervision. Similarly, a moderate and positive
relationship was found to exist between both job involvement and intrinsic
motivation and the measures of autonomy and democratic supervision. Only a
slight negative relationship was found to exist between intrinsic mo-
tivation and authoritarianism while a strong negative one was found when
job involvement was looked at.

The direction and strength of the relationships between organizational
factors and orientations to work follow the pattern which our analysis
anticipated. People's morale, their involvement with their jobs and their
intrinsic motivation should be higher in organizations which minimize
strict authoritarian control and which maximize the amount Of control that

the workers can exercise. These relationships follow directly from those

249

found with respect to need satisfaction and they also reinforce the posi-
tion taken both by advocates of OWL and in the concept of alienation.

Finally, the impact of the organizational factors on people's behav-
ioural responses to work was examined. The results here suggested that
authoritarianism was very strongly related to confrontational types of
responses and moderately related to a lack of cooperation on the part of
these workers. A moderate and negative relationship was also reported
between confrontation and both autonomy and democratic supervision indicat-
ing that confrontation decreases as these two organizational factors
increase.

A moderate to strong relationship was found between these factors and
workers cooperation scores which coincides with the results reported with
the confrontation measures.

The organizational structure can be seen therefore as a key for
influencing both the extent of need satisfaction among the workers as well
as their attitudinal and behavioural responses to work. The specific items
used to measure the organizational factors in this study rested on the
social relationships which these people encountered in their jobs.
Authoritarianism, autonomy and democratic supervision have one unifying
theme; control over work. The strong relationship between these measures
and higher order need satisfaction in particular, should be singled out for
attention. The satisfaction of higher order needs is the lynch pin which
holds much of this analysis together. The QWL movement places a great deal
of importance on this and the impact that it has on the rest of a persons'
-life. If higher order needs are satisfied at work, a person's entire life
is affected according to this construct. A similar analysis can be made

with respect to the concept of alienation. Work should be a prime area in

250

a person's life, for the satisfaction of higher order needs. When this
occurs and people do exercise control over their work, alienation is
minimized. People experience themselves in their work and no separation
exists. When this does not occur, the Opposite results.

This aspect of our analysis brings us full circle in a sense, since we
began by outlining the problems Of alienation. In our discussion, this was
couched in structural terms reflecting the forms which work organizations
have taken within capitalist formations in particular. We argued that
control rather than efficiency was the operative concept in describing
these work organizations. The costs and consequences of various control
practices were outlined and the development of the QWL movement was de-
scribed. This movement sought better organizational forms as a solution to
the problem. The findings of this research provide support for this formu—
lation. The use of the OWL approach and the application of the concept Of
alienation both pointed to the need for work organizations in which people
can have control over their work and jobs which provide them the opportuni-
ty to satisfy higher order human needs.

It is becoming increasingly evident that the organizations which we
will need in the future will have to be both productive and efficient. The
calculation of efficiency and productivity however, must take into account
the social dimension of this equation. As the industrial sector of the
economy becomes increasingly dominated by robots and computers, the service
sector will continue to absorb large numbers of people. Sophisticated
technology and specialized hardware offer limited returns in this area
where the major component of an organization's operation will increasingly
be its people. We will have to expand and develop our use of human re»

sources to use the popular jargon, in order to make our organizations both

251

productive and efficient. We will have to create organizations which allow
people to be all that they can and want to be in order to accomplish this.
This task is far too important for us to do otherwise and we will experi-
ence severe consequences if we should fail in this endeavor.

This research has pointed to the direction which these changes should
take. The impact of organizational factors on higher order need satisfac-
tion as well as on people's attitudes and behaviour at work make this quite
clear. Future research should focus on the way that control functions
operate in organizations especially those in which people gp_satisfy higher
order needs. Perhaps, the next step would be to carry out research with
white collar workers who are higher in the hierarchy than these lower level
Residential Counsellors were. The responses of the Nursing Unit staff, for
example, on such variables as job involvement and cooperation suggests that
this may prove fruitful since power and control over work may operate in a
positive way for people in the more powerful positions in an organization.
Research involving teachers, social workers, middle level managers and
executives would add to our understanding of how the nature of control and
the organization of work affect people with various amounts of autonomy.

An important point raised in the present study, demonstrated the
impact of basic and social need satisfaction as opposed to higher order
need satisfaction on the attitudinal and behavioural responses of workers.
In this research, there was widespread consensus among the staff that these
needs were in fact being met. In our discussion we suggested that the
findings we obtained might have been different if these needs had not been
perceived as satisfied. This is an important point since much of the
debate concerning workers in undesirable jobs involves a consideration of

the amount of money they are paid or the benefits they receive. The very

252

strong relationship found in the present study between higher order need
satisfaction and people's attitudes and behaviour at work calls into
question some Of the accepted wisdom in this area. Higher order needs may
be more important than we have given them credit for and the focus on basic
needs may have been over emphasized in the past. This may be especially
true in situations where instrumental responses to work are most common.
Studies of job satisfaction and the difficulties encountered in interpret-
ing this concept testify to this and indicate that people make choices
based on the reality they experience. Certain types of responses are more
or less likely then when basic and social needs are satisfied. Instrumen-
tality may be more a reflection of the reality perceived by these workers
than it is of what their orientations to work would otherwise be. More
research on this issue would help to clarify the situation and help us
better understand how people make sense out of their working lives.
Finally, this research has shown that people chose to be cooperative
or confrontational in spite of the consequences that their behaviour may
have for their employment. People reported being involved in some serious
breaches of the rules and regulations of the organization which in many
cases could have resulted in their dismissals, even in an economy which was
poor and the unemployment rate high. People choose to follow rules.
People also choose to avoid, ignore or violate them. The managerial or
organizational perspective from which many of the studies in this area are
written fail to acknowledge that the people who work in these organizations
are more than the recipients of management's actions or its victims. They
are, instead, real living, thinking, feeling, acting human beings who have
minds of their own and who choose to act. Sometimes, the actions are

contrary to the organization's wishes. This presents a much more realistic

253

picture of the Operation of organizations, one which is better able to
handle the complexities encountered in analyzing them.

People create themselves and their world through their activity.
Through their actions, they can make their organizations better or worse
places to live and work. The quality of life that people experience
ultimately depends on the nature of the relationships which constitute at
once the basis of their organizations and the social structure Of their

societies.

254

APPENDIX: A Interview Schedule

1.0. _1__; CARD : Interviewer

 

 

1, 2, 3 4
M.S.U. QUALITY OF WORKING LIFE SURVEY

 

TIME STARTED: TIME COMPLETED: LENGTH OF INTERVIEW:

Hello, my name is . I am working on a survey being
done by the Department of Sociology at Michigan State University. The
survey is part of a study on the quality of working life and people in many
different occupations are being interviewed. You are one of the people who
has been selected to be interviewed. The procedure for selecting people is
a scientific one designed to produce a representative sample so we really
need your co-operation. It will not take much of your time and your
answers will be strictly confidential. In fact, your name will not even be
put on the answer sheet.

 

QUESTIONS:

1. First of all, we would like some information about your job and work
experience. What is your present job?
(GET SPECIFIC JOB TITLE)

 

job title
b) What do you do on the job? What are some of your duties?

 

 

c) How long have you been in that job? (GET YEAR AT WHICH
CONTINUOUS EMPLOYMENT IN THIS JOB BEGAN)
1. less than one year 5. 4 to 5 years
number of years 2. one to two years 6. 5 to 10 years
3. two to three years 7. 10 to 15 years
4. three to four years 8. 15 to 20 years
9. 20 years and over

 

2. Now, can you tell me what job you had immediately before the present
one?

 

job title
b) What were your duties on that job?

 

 

255

c) How long were you on that job?

. 4 to 5 years

5 to 10 years

. 10 to 15 years

. 15 to 20 years

. 20 years and over

1. less than 1 year
number of years 2. 1 to 2 years

3. 2 to 3 years

4. 3 to 4 years

 

\OCDVC‘U'I
O

3. What was the last year in which you were a full time student?
[CODE NUMBER OF YEARS SINCE LEAVING SCHOOL]

. 4 to 5 years

. 5 to 10 years

. 10 to 15 years

. 25 to 20 years

. 20 years or more

. less than 1 year
. 1 to 2 years
. 2 to 3 years
. 3 to 4 years

 

actual year

thH
\DCDVO‘UT

4. How many full time jobs have you held since leaving school?

0 = M0

 

2.
7.

II 11
com

1 = 1, 2 3 ,

6 = 6, 7 8 ,

5. Now we would like to know how much you agree or disagree with some
statements about various aspects of your job. Here is a card with
numbered responses from strongly agree to strongly disagree. I will
read a statement and you tell me which number on the card represents
your response. Please try to think about your responses as though you
were giving them to yourself rather than to me or to anyone else.
While all of the statements are somewhat similar, each contains
something different. Please think about the statements carefully

before responding.

a) My job requires me to be able to handle surprising or
unpredictable situations.

b) My supervisor encourages me to participate in important
decisions.

c) I have a great deal of say over what has to be done on my job.

d) My supervisor gives responsibility to those he/she supervises.

e) My job allows me to determine my own work pace.

f) My supervisor knows his/her job well.

9) Most Of the important decisions on my job are made by the super-
visor alone.

h) I am told what I have to do on my job.

i) My supervisor encourages those he/she supervises to develop new
ways of doing things.

j) I always know what I should be doing on my job.

k) I have a lot of say over how work tasks will be divided among

myself and my work group.

WE ARE FINISHED WITH THE CARD FOR THE TIME BEING

9a.

9b

10.

256

Now can you tell me how many people, including yourself, have the same
immediate supervisor?

 

 

O = M0 4 = 11 to 15 8 = 41 to 50
actual number 1 = 1 to 3 5 = 16 to 20 9 = 50 or more

2 = 4 to 6 6 = 21 to 30

3 = 7 to 10 7 = 31 to 40
How many peOple see you as their direct supervisor?

0 = M0 4 = 11 to 15 7 = 31 to 40
actual number 1 = 1 to 3 5 = 16 to 20 8 = 41 to 50

2 = 4 to 6 6 = 21 to 30 9 = 50 or more

3 = 7 to 10

Some people say it's not what you know but who you know that counts,
especially when it comes to getting a job or a promotion. Can you
tell how it is at your place? For example...

a) If someone is trying to get a job is what you know or who you

 

know more important? What = 1 Who = 2
b) If someone is trying to get a promotion, is what you know or who
you know more important? What = 1 Who = 2

How do the formal qualifications required to get your job reflect the
skills needed to do the job? Can you tell me if you:

1) Are overqualified for the job.

2) Have about the right qualifications for the job.

3) Are underqualified for the job.

How much of the time do you use your training and skills to the
fullest on your job? (ASK FOR PERCENTAGE)

 

O = M0 5 = 41 - 50
percentage 1 = 1 - 10 6 = 51 - 60
2 = 11 = 20 7 = 61 - 7O
3 = 21 - 30 8 = 71 - 80
4 = 31 - 4O 9 = 81 - 100

The following statements describe how some people respond to their

jobs. Here is that card again with numbered responses from strongly

agree to strongly disagree. I will read a statement and you tell me

which number on the card represents your response. Please think about

the statements carefully before responding.

a) The major satisfaction in my life comes from my job.

b) When I do my job well, it contributes to my personal growth and

satisfaction.

c) The most important things that happen to me involve my job.

d) I feel a great sense of personal satisfaction when I do my job
well.

) I live, eat and breathe my job.

) Doing my job well increases my feelings of self esteem.

) I am very much involved personally with my job.

) Most things in life are more important than work.

) I am really a perfectionist about my work.

) When I do my job well, it gives me a feeling of accomplishment.

WE ARE FINISHED WITH THE CARD FOR THE TIME BEING.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

257

Now I'd like to ask you about how you are evaluated on your job.
a) Can you tell me how many times a year FORMAL evaluations are made
of how well you are doing your job?

 

O = M0 5 = 5
times/year 1 = 1 6 = 6

2 = 2 7 = 7

3 = 3 8 = 8

4 = 4 9 = 9 or more

b) How often on a typical day are INFORMAL evaluations made of how
well you are doing your job?

 

0 = M0 5 = 5
how Often 1 = 1 6 = 6
2 = 2 7 = 7
3 = 3 8 = 8
4 = 4 9 = 9 or more

Can you tell me what specific criteria are used in evaluating how well
you do your job? (PROBE FOR SPECIFIC CRITERIA)

 

 

 

Are there others where you work who have more or less the same job as
yours?

a) Yes = 1 b) N0 = 2 IF NO SKIP TO 15
IF YES

Is it easy or hard to tell whether or not you are doing a better or
worse job than they do? That is, is it easy or hard to compare your
work and the work of others?

a) Easy = 1 b) Hard = 2

Are there differences in how well people do their jobs or is every-
one's performance about the same?

a) Differences = 1 b) Same = 2 SAME SKIP TO 17.
IF DIFFERENCES:

Does the evaluation process take these differences into account?

a) Yes = 1 b) NO =2

 

 

Do you think the supervisor uses the right criteria or the right basis
when he/she evaluates your work?

1 IF YES SKIP TO 19
2

a) Yes
b) No
IF NO

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

258

What criteria or basis should be used?

 

 

b) HOwThard would it be to get him/her to use the right criteria?
Would you say it would be:

Very hard to do

Hard to do

Somewhat hard to do

Not very hard to do

wao—b

Sometimes peOple do things to avoid being evaluated on the job. Have
you ever done this?

I = Yes
2 = No
IF YES
b) How often would you say this happens? 1 = Very Often
2 = Often
3 = Occasionally
4 = Not very often at all

c) Can you give me an example?

 

d) In some cases entire groups of people get together to avoid being
evaluated on the job. Has this ever happened where you work?

Yes = 1 N0 = 2
e. How Often would you say this happens?
1 very Often 3 = occasionally

2

Often 4 not very often at all
Are you required to keep a detailed record of your work activities?
Yes = 1 N0 = 2

Does 'favouritism' on the part of the supervisor play a role in the
evaluation process where you work?
Yes = 1 N0 = 2

What percentage of your work time is spent under the direct super-
vision of your supervisor?

 

1 = 1-10 5 = 41-50
percentage 2 = 11-20 6 = 51-60
3 = 21-30 7 = 61-70
4 = 31-40 8 = 71-80
9 = 81 or more

How much freedom do you have over what you do on your job?
Would you say that you have:

a great deal of freedom

some freedom

a little freedom

no freedom at all

waa—o

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

259

When doing your job, do you decide how much time to spend on a
particular task:

1 = all of the time

2 = most of the time
3 = some Of the time
4 = none Of the time

Taking everything into account, how satisfied are you with your job as
it is now? Would you say that you are:
4

1 = Very satisfied = Somewhat dissatisfied
2 = Satisfied 5 = Dissatisfied
3 = Somewhat satisfied 6 = Very dissatisfied

Why or why not?

 

 

What one thing is there about your job that makes it particularly
interesting?

 

 

What one thins is there about your job that makes it particularly
rewarding?

 

 

What one thing is there about your job that makes it particularly
difficult?

 

 

What one thing is there about your job that makes it particularly
undesirable?

 

 

In some jobs, people compete with co-workers for promotions, raises
and desirable assignments. Thinking about your job, would you say it
is?

1 = very competitive

2 = somewhat competitive

3 = not very competitive

4 = not competitive at all

How would you describe your own behaviour at work? Would you say that
you are:

1 = very competitive

2 = somewhat competitive

3 = not very competitive

4 = not competitive at all

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

260

Do you plan to stay in the specific job you have now until you retire?
1 = Yes IF YES SKIP TO 35
2 = NO

What job do you plan to change to?

 

 

Why do you want to make this change?

 

 

How hard would it be for you to get promoted or to move up where you
work? Would it be:

1 = very difficult

2 = somewhat difficult

3 = not very difficult

4 = not difficult at all

How important is getting a promotion or moving up for you? Would you
say it is:

1 = very important

2 = somewhat important

3 = not very important

4 = not important at all

The following statements describe various aspects of people's jobs.

Here is that card again with numbered responses from strongly agree to

strongly disagree. I will read a statement and you tell me which

number on the card represents your response. Please think about the

statements carefully before responding.

a) People I work with encourage each other and work together.

b) communications are good among my co-workers.

c) Most of the time I prefer to work alone.

d) If I have a problem on the job, I can count on my co-workers for
help and support.

e) If I should fall behind at work, I can count on my co-workers to
cover for me while I get caught up.

f) In general, my co-workers and I have a good attitude about
working here.

9) When I see something wrong at work, I try to figure out how to
solve the problem and tell my supervisor about it.

h) At work, I am always trying to figure out better ways of doing my
job.

i) I try to do a good job at work even if no one is around to see
it.

j) Basically, it doesn't matter how hard you work around here, you
get the same pay whether you do a lot of work or a little.

WE ARE FINISHED WITH THE CARD FOR THE TIME BEING.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

261

Compared to the amount of effort you could put into your job if it
really turned you on, how much effort do you find yourself putting
into your job on a day to day basis? Would you say you put in?

4

1 = 90% or more = 60 to 70%
2 = 80 to 90% 5 = 50 to 60%
3 = 70 to 80% 6 = less than 50%

What percentage of the effort you put into your job is lost because of
things on your job over which you have no control?
0

 

= M0
percentage 1 = 1 - 10 5 = 41 - 50
2 = 11 - 20 6 = 51 - 6O
3 = 21 - 3O 7 = 61 - 70
4 = 31 - 4O 9 = 81 - 100
Can you give an example of this?

 

 

Have you ever taken a day Off from work when you were not really sick
but just needed a break?
1 Yes IF YES: How Often would you say you do this?
2 No (RECORD ACTUAL NUMBER OF TIMES PER YEAR)
1=1, 2=2, 3=3, 4=4, 5=5, 6=6, 7=7, 8=8, 9=9 or more.

 

Sometimes workers take longer coffee and lunch breaks than those
allowed by management. Have you ever done this?

 

1 = Yes IF YES: How often would you say you do this in a
typical week?

2 = NO (RECORD ACTUAL NUMBER) 1 = 1-2 5 = 10-11

2 = 3-4 6 = 12-13

3 = 5-6 7 = 14-15

4 = 7-8 8 = 16-17

4 = 9-10 9 = never

Some people like to work in a place where people talk and joke around.
Others prefer a place where people work alone. Which type of place do
you prefer?

I a place where people joke around

2 a place where people work alone

Can you tell me how it is at your place?
1 = Do people joke around or
2 = 00 people work alone?

00 people you work with ever get together and have contests or invent
little games while at work to help the time go faster?

1 = Yes

2 = No

IF YES: Can you give me an example?

 

 

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

262

I would like to describe some imaginary situations and ask you what

would be most likely to happen in these situations where you work.

a) You and the people you work with are getting very bored and
restless. What do you think would happen?

 

 

b) Your supervisor makes major changes in your job and the jobs of
your co-workers without any discussions with the workers
beforehand. What do you think would happen?

 

(‘5
w

c) Your supervisor is very harsh with you for no apparent reason.
What do you think you would do?

 

 

d) A problem at work has gone unresolved for a very long time. What
do you think would happen?

 

 

Most organizations have rules and regulations governing the way people
act while at work. In some places, rules are closely followed while
in other places rules are largely ignored. Can you tell me how it is
where you work? Would you say the rules are:

1 = followed very closely 3 = not followed very closely

2 = followed closely 4 = not followed closely at all
Are there rules where you work that seem to prevent you from doing
your job?

1 = Yes 2 = No

 

IF YES: Can you give me an example?

 

If a work rule did not make sense to you, would you follow it even if
there was no one around to catch you breaking it?

1 Yes

2 NO

Would you say that ygg_follow the rules on your job:

1 = all of the time

2 = most Of the time

3 = some of the time

4 = or do you usually ignore the rules

Which rules do you break least Often?

 

Which rules do you break most often?

 

52.

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

158.

559.

(5(3.

263

Have you ever gotten very angry or frustrated with something at work?
1 ' Yes

2 NO

IF YES: How Often would you say this happens?

 

I = once a day or more
2 = less than once a day but more than once a week
3 = less than once a week but more than once a month

What is most likely to happen if you get upset at work?

 

4
5

less than once a month but more than once a year
less than once a year

What do you consider to be the most serious thing you have done at
work when you were angry or frustrated?

 

What is the most serious action you have seen someone else take at
work when they were angry or frustrated?

 

Have you ever been Officially reprimanded? That is, has anything bee
entered on your personnel record?

 

 

1 = Yes IF YES: How many times has this happened? 1 = 1 6 =
2 = NO 2 = 2 7 =
record actual number 3 = 3 8 =

4 = 4 9 =

5 = 5 or

more

Have you ever been suspended from your job?

1 = Yes IF YES: How many times has this happened? 1 = 1 6 =
2 = No 2 = 2 7 =
record actual number 3 = 3 8 =

4 = 4 9 =
5 = 5 or

more

Is there a union where you work?
1 Yes
2 No

 

DO you think unions help or hinder workers in improving working
conditions?

1 = Help

2 = Hinder

Why do you feel this way? (TRY T? LIMIT DISCUSSION TO ONE POINT. BE
BRIEF

1'1

6
7
8
9

tooowm

 

 

264

This completes the first part Of the interview. In the next part, I

would like you to record your answers yourself. In the meantime, I will be
transferring the answers you gave in the first part. Here is part two.
[HAND RESPONDENT PART TWO] Please follow the instructions given at the top
of each section.

PART II:

The following statements describe a variety of job related factors.

Please indicate the extent to which each Of the statements describes
the situation where you work. Do not evaluate the statements in terms
of 'good' or 'bad', but read each statement and answer in terms of how
well it describes the situation where you work.

INSTRUCTIONS:

 

a) Read each statement carefully.

b) Think about how well the statement describes the situation where
you work.

c) Select a response from the following:

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

. Disagree

Strongly Disagree

d) Record your answer in the space provided along the left hand
margin.

e) The value of this survey depends on your being frank in your
answers. Remember, your answers are strictly confidential.

m-Pwa—l

ANSWERS

1. My job requires that I use a wide range of my abilities.

2. What happens around here is really important to me.

3. I feel very loyal to this organization

4. I used to care about my work more than I do now.

5. I often think Of quitting.

6. My job requires that I keep on learning new things.

7. I can influence the decisions that affect my job.

8. I have a great deal of freedom to run my own job.

9. I don't really like working here. All the rules and regulations make
you feel like you're in prison.

10. Ultimately, my supervisor has too much control over my job.

11. You can give an honest opinion around here without any worry.

12. lhe administration is much too strict in enforcing the rules around

ere.

13. Compared with people doing similar types of work in this community, I
am well paid.

14. The benefits package in this job is very good.

15. Job security for people like me in this organization is very good.

16. If I left this job, I could find a similar or better job.

17. Working here brings me the respect of my family and neighbours.

265

18. Around here I am treated as an adult.

19. I used to be more ambitious about my job than I am now.

20. I am proud to tell people where I work.

21. Changes in this organization usually create more problems than they
solve.

22. If I could get a good paying job somewhere else, I'd leave this job in
a minute.

23. Some major changes are needed before things get better around here.

24. People at the top of this organization are aware of the problems at my
level.

PART III:

The following statements describe a number of things that people

sometimes do when they are bored, frustrated or angry. Read each one
carefully. Think about how it applies to your job and answer in the space
provided.

1.

Have you ever worked as fast as you could just just to see how much
work you could get done? b) If you answered "yes", how often would
1 - Yes you say this happens?
2 NO (how often)

 

Have you ever worked as slowly as possible just to see how little work
you could get done?

1 Yes

2 No

b) If you answered 'yes' how often would you say this happens?

 

(how often)

Have you ever 'deliberately' misplaced a report, memo or piece of
equipment because you were angry or frustrated with what was going on
at work?

1 Yes

2 No

b) If you answered 'yes', how often would you say this happens?

 

(how often)

Have you ever turned your back and avoided taking responsibility for
things going on at work?

1 Yes

No

 

2

b) If you answered 'yes', how Often would you say this happens?

 

(how often)

Have you ever walked Off the job while on duty without permission?
1 - Yes
2 No

10.

11.

266

b) If you answered 'yes' how Often would you say this happens?

 

(how often)

Have you ever spent your time daydreaming or doodling while at work
when you should have been working?

1 Yes

2 No

b) If you answered 'yes', how often would you say this happens?

 

(how Often)

Have you ever come to work drunk or stoned?
1 Yes
2 No

 

b) If you answered 'yes', how often would you say this happens?

 

(how Often)
Have you ever gotten drunk or stoned while you were at work?
1 = Yes
2 = NO

b) If you answered 'yes', how often would you say this happens?

 

(how Often)
Have you ever 'borrowed' anything from work for your own personal use?
1 = Yes
2 = No

b) If you answered 'yes', how Often would you say this happens?

 

(how often)

Have you ever 'deliberately' damaged a piece of equipment Of machinery
at work?

1 Yes

2 No

 

b) If you answered 'yes', how often would you say this happens?

 

(how often)

Have you ever talked back to your supervisor or other superior?
1 Yes
2 No

 

b) If you answered 'yes', how often would you say this happens?

 

(how often)

267

 

 

 

 

 

 

12. Have you ever refused to follow a direct order from your supervisor?
1 = Yes
2 = No
b) If you answered 'yes', how often would you say this happens?
(how Often)
13. Have you ever gotten really 'bitchy' or short tempered at work because
you were angry or frustrated?
I = Yes
2 = No
b) If you answered 'yes', how Often would you say this happens?
(how Often)
14. Have you ever gotten 'bitchy' or short tempered at home because of
something happening at work?
1 = Yes
2 = No
b) If you answered 'yes', how often would you say this happens?
(how often)
15. Have you ever yelled or screamed at a supervisor or other employee
because you were angry or frustrated at work?
1 = Yes
2 = No
b) If you answered 'yes', how Often would you say this happens?
(how often)
PART IV:

Place a check mark in the space beside the response which best de-

scribes your answer. If the question requires a written answer, use the
space provided. Please print your answers clearly.

I.

How would you describe the morale where you work? Would you say it
is:
1) Very high

2) High

3) Neither high or low
4) Low

5) Very low

What would you say is the gag thing that most affects morale where you
work?

 

 

268

3. How important is the amount of pay you receive in affecting your
overall attitude about your job? Would you say it is:
1) Very important
2) Somewhat important
3) Not very important
4) Not important at all

4. Have you ever taken it out on your fellow employees when you were
angry or frustrated with something at work?
1) Yes
2) No
3) If your answer is 'yes', can you give an example of what you do?

 

 

4) If your answer is 'yes', how often would you say this happens?

 

(how Often)

5. When you get angry or frustrated at work, does it affect how you act

 

at home?

1) Yes

2) No

3) If your answer is 'yes', can you give me an example of what you
do?

 

4) If your answer is 'yes', how often would you say this happens?

 

(how often)

6. How hard would you say it is for you to have to face coming into work
everyday? Would you say it is:
1) Very hard
2) Somewhat hard
3) Not very hard
4) Not hard at all
Can you explain why you feel this way?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PART V:

1. Age 2. Sex 3. Marital Status
under 20 40 to 44 Male Single
20 to 24 45 to 49 Female Married
25 to 29 50 to 54 Separated
30 to 34 55 to 59 Divorced
35 to 39 60 and over Widowed

4. Have you ever been divorced? 5. How many dependents do you have?

Yes

 

No (number)

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

269

What is the highest grade of school you completed?
some grade school

completed grade school

some high school

completed high school

some college

completed college

some university

completed university

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What degree's, diploma's or certificates do you hold?

 

What is the original nationality of your family on your father's side?

 

What is the original nationality Of your family on your mother's side?

 

Place a check mark next to those individuals in your family who were
born in Canada.

you your father your mother
paternal grandfather paternal grandmother
maternal grandfather maternal grandmother

What is/was your father's occupation most of the time while you were
growing up at home?

a) Title c) Check one:

b) Describe the job Self employed

Worked in a small company
Worked in a large company

 

 

 

What is/was your mother's occupation most Of the time while you were
growing up at home?

a) Title c) Check one:

b) Describe the job Self employed

Worked in a small company
Worked in a large company

 

 

 

What is the highest grade of school completed by your father?
some grade school

completed grade school

some high school

completed high school

some college

completed college

some university

completed university

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What is the highest grade of school completed by your mother?
some grade school
completed high school

some high school

completed high school

 

 

 

270

some college
completed college
some university
completed university

 

 

15. Who is the principle wage earner in your household

 

16. What is your yearly income?

 

 

 

 

 

under 10,000 30,000 to 34,999

10,000 to 14,999 35,000 to 39,999

15,000 to 19,999 40,000 to 44,999

20,000 to 24,000 45,000 to 49,999

25,000 to 29,999 50,000 and over

17. What is your religious preference? 18.How active are you in this area?

Protestant Very active

Catholic Somewhat active

Jewish Not very active

Other Not active at all

None

NOTES

CHAPTER ONE:

 

1.

10.
11.

12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.

18.

Fredrick W. Taylor quoted in Jeremy Brecher and Tim Costello, "Common
sense For Hard Times." New York, Two Continents Publishing Group,
Ltd., 1976:60.

James O'Toole, ”Work In America. Report of a Special Task Force to
the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare." Cambridge, Mass.,
M.I.T. Press, 1972.

Theodore Mills, "Human Resources - Why The New Concern?" in the
Harvard Business Review, April, p. 120.

J. A. Lischeron and Toby Wall, "Employee Participation: An Experi-
mental Field Study." In Human Relations, December, 1975, Pp. 863-884.

Theodore Mills, "What Is Quality of Working Life?" Labour Canada,
Minister of Supply and Services, 1981, p.12.

Robert M. Guest, "Innovative Work Practices." Work in America Insti-
tute: Studies In Productivity. New York, Pergamon Press Inc., 1982.

Bruce Stokes, “Worker Participation - Productivity and the Quality of
Work Life." Worldwatch, Paper No.25, December, 1978, p.5.

Business Week, May 11, 1981, Pp. 84-98.

James O'Toole, 1972, op. cit.

Ibid.

Ibid. For an extensive discussion of the conflict at the Lordstown
assembly plant see Stanely Aronowitz, "False Promises." New York,
McGraw-Hill CO., 1973.

James O'Toole, 1972, op. cit., p.19.

Theodore Mills, 1981, Op. cit., p.7.

Bruce Stokes, 1978, op. cit., p.10.

Ibid., p.10.

James O'Toole, 1972, op. cit., p. XVI.

Howard Watchel, "Class Consciousness and Stratification in the Labour
Process." In Richard Edwards, M. Reich and T.Weisskopf eds., "The
Capitalist System." Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,
1978, p. 284.

James O'Toole, 1972, Op. cit., p. 18.

19.
20.
21.

22.
23.
24.
25.

26.
27.

28.
29.
30.

31.
32.

33.

34.
35.

Howard Wachtel, 1978, Op. cit., p. 287.
James O'Toole 1972, op. cit.

See Mills, 1975, op. cit., for a discussion of the mood of the era.
This is also discussed by Robert Lauer in his book "Social Problems
and the Quality of Life." William C.Brown Publishers. Dubuque, qua,
1978.

James O'Toole, 1972, op. cit., p. 32.
Ibid.
Stokes, 1978, op. cit., p. 11

This is discussed in Robert Blauner's work, "Alienation and Freedom."
London, University of Chicago Press, 1964. He compares several types
of work organization and their impact on worker alienation in this
study.

Stokes 1978, Op. cit., p. 12.

Charles A. Reich, "The Greening of America." Toronto, Ontario, Bantam
Books Of Canada, Ltd., p. 33.

James O'Toole, 1972, op. cit.
Ibid., p. 18.

This type of approach is displayed in a series of documents published
by the Ontario Ministry of Labour entitled, "Issues in the Quality of
Working Life." They are produced by the Ontario Quality of Working
Life Centre which is under the direction of Dr. Hans van Beinum and
are aimed at groups which are trying to implement their own QWL
programmes.

Theodore Mills, 1975, op. cit., p. 121.

In this regard a great deal of work was carried out in the mid-sixties
at the Tavistock Institute in London. See, for example, F. E. Emery
and E. L. Trist, “SociO-Technical Systems," in C.W. Churchman and

M. Verhulst, eds., Management Science, Models and Techniques, Vol. 2,
Oxford, Pergamon, 1960, Pp. 83-97. Also, F. E. Emery and E. Thorswd,
Democracy at Work. Leiden Martinus Nijhoff Social Sciences Division,
1970.

David Jenkins, "QWL - Current Trends and Directions." In Issues in
the Quality of Working Life, NO. 3, December 1981. Ontario Quality of
Working Life Centre, Ontario Ministry of Labour, p. 16.

Ibid.

This reflects the concept of alienation developed by Marx in, "The
Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1884,“ in "Writings of the

36.

37.

38.

39.
40.
41.
42.
43.

44.

45.
46.

47.

48.

49.
50.

51.
52.
53.

Young Marx on Philosophy and Society. Lloyd Easton and Kurk H. Guddat
eds., New York, Anchor Books, 1976.

James Rinehart, "The Tyranny of Work." Don Mills Ontario, Academic
Press of Canada, 1975, p. 83.

Ibid. See also the Work in America report for a discussion of the
failure of the white collar jobs to meet their expectations in terms
Of non-alienating work.

Bertram Silverman and Murray Yanowitch eds., "The Worker in Post
Industrial Capitalism.“ New York, The Free Press, 1974, p. 66.

Mills, 1981, Op. cit., p. 1.

James Rinehart, 1975, Op. cit., p. 83.
James O'Toole, 1972, Op. cit., p. 20.
Ibid., p. 39.

Margaret Levi, "Bureaucratic Insurgency," Lexington Mass., D.C. Heath
and CO., 1977.

Harry Braverman, Labour and Monopoly Capital." New York, Monthly
Review Press, 1974.

Bruce Stokes 1978, op. cit., p. 11.

This process is discussed at length by Philip Kraft in, "Programmers

and Managers, The Routinization of Computer Programming in the United
States." New York, Springer-Verlag. See also his work, "The Indus-

trialization of Computer Programming," in Andrew Zimbalist ed., "Case
Studies on the Labour Process." New York, Monthly Review Press, pp.

1-17.

Barbara Garson, "All the Livelong Day," Garden City, New York,
Doubleday, 1975. .

The use of technology for control purposes is discussed by Richard
Edwards in, "Contested Terrain." New York, Basic Books Inc., 1979.

Garson, 1975, ibid.

Charles Perrow, "Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay." Glenview,
Illinois, Scott, Foresman and CO., 1979, p. 149.

Ibid., chapter 4.
Ibid., p. 152.
The notion of the "fiscal crisis of the state" is developed by James

O'Connor and it indicates that the state will find it increasingly
difficult to meet the demands which are placed on it. The potential

for conflict is especially high among white collar workers in the
public sector of the economy since their jobs are controlled directly
by the state and they are likely the ones who will be called on to
make the largest sacrifices in times Of economic restraint. Recent
events in British Columbia involving public sector unions as well as
the struggles involving the air traffic controllers are two examples
Of this type of conflict. For an expanded discussion of this and
related issues see his book, "The Fiscal Crisis of the State," New
York, St. Martin's Press, 1973.

NOTES

CHAPTER TWO.

 

1.

10.

11.
12.

13.

Karl Marx, "The Economic and PhilOSOphic Manuscripts of 1844," in
Lloyd Easton and Kurt H. Guddat eds., "Writings of the Young Marx on
Philosophy and Society." New York, Anchor Books, 1976.

William Faunce, "Problems of an Industrial Society," New York,
McGraw-Hill, 1981, p. 131.

Karl Marx in ”Karl Marx: Early Writings," T. B. Bottomore ed., New
York, McGraw-Hill, 1964, p. 124.

Erich Fromm, "Marx's Concept of Man," New York, Fredrick Ungar Pub—
lishing Company, 1961, p. 106.

For a discussion of the philosophy of internal relations see
Bertell Ollman, "Alienation: Marx's Conception of Man in Capitalistic
Society," Cambridge, Mass., Cambridge University Press, 1971.

Ibid, p. 14.

Karl Marx, "Capital. Volume One," in "Marx - Engels Reader,"
Robert C. Tucker, ed., New York, W.W. Norton and CO., Inc., 1968, p.
430.

This analysis of Marx's position is presented in James Rinehart, "The
Tyranny of Work," Don Mills, Ontario, Academic Press, 1975.

Ibid., p. 19.

The argument about the use of technology for control rather than for
explicitly efficiency reasons is made by the following authors among
others; Stephen A. Marglin, “What Do Bosses 00?", The Review of
Radical Political Economics, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1974, Pp. 33-60; Dan
Clawson, "Bureaucracy and the Labour Process," New York, Monthly
Review Press, 1980; Howard Wachtel, “Class Consciousness and
Stratification in the Labour Process," in Richard Edwards, et. al.,
"The Capitalist System," Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall,
1978, Pp. 283-286.

Faunce, 1981, Op. cit., p. 134.

For a discussion of the uses of alienation see the following authors
among others; Joachim Isareal, “Alienation from Marx to Modern Soci-
ology: A Macro-Sociological Analysis," Boston, Allyn and Bacon, 1971;
Alfred M. Lee, "An Obituary for Alienation," in Social Forces, Vol.
29, Summer, 1972, Pp. 121-127; Richard Schacht, "Alienation," Garden
City, New York, Doubleday and CO., Inc., 1970.

A discussion of this issue is presented in Archibald, 1976, ibid., in
which both aspects Of this concept are examined. Seeman's work
represents the type of approach most Often described as a

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.
19.
20.
21.
22.

23.
24.

psychological one while Rinehart outlines the elements of a structural
definition. Seeman's position is outlined in his article. On the
Meaning of Alienation," American Sociological Review, Vol. 24, 1959,
Pp. 783-791. Rinehart's work, "The Tyranny of Work," was cited above.
Archibald's discussion shows how both psychological and structural
elements are included in the concept of alienation and he suggests
that both can be used in an empirical examination of the concept.

See Faunce 1981, op. cit., for a discussion of Seeman's conceptualiza-
tion of alienation.

Robert Blauner, "Alienation and Freedom," London, University of
Chicago Press, 1964.

Rinehart, 1975, op. cit., presents a critique Of psychological concep-
tualizations of alienation. He suggests that people need not be able
to verbalize their alienated mental states in order for alienation to
exist. He discusses an incident in Britain in which workers forcibly
occupied their factory only one month after they had reported being
satisfied with their jobs. This he says demonstrates the necessity to
look at people's behavioural responses to work.

Iriwin Deutscher, "What We Say, What We Do," Glenville, Illinois,
Scott, Foresman, 1973.

James Rinehart, 1975, op. cit., p. 18.

W. Peter Archibald, 1976, Op. cit., Pp. 59-74.
Ibid., p. 34.

James Rinehart, 1975, op. cit., 17-18.

Understanding outbursts of violent behaviour as more than irrational
actions is discussed by Laurie Taylor and Paul Walton in, “Industrial
Sabotage: Motives and Meanings," in Stanley Cohen, ed., "Images of
Deviance," Middlesex, England, Penguin Books, Ltd., 1971, Pp. 219-245.
This type of behaviour among juveniles is the focus of study in
Elliott Leyton's book, "The Myth of Delinquency," Toronto, McClelland
and Stewart Ltd., 1979. Leyton argues that these seemingly purpose-
less, nihilistic acts are in reality encoded messages by these people
and the task of the social scientist is to learn the codes. People
behave in meaningful ways according to Leyton and this type of behav-
iour should be understood as such.

Richard Edwards, 1979, Op. cit.

A number of excellent historical studies of the labour process have
been published in recent years which characterize the intensity of the
struggles which have gone on between management and labour. Among
these are David Montgomery, "Workers' Control in America: Studies in
the History of Work, Technology. and Labour Struggles," Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1979. See also Herbert Gutman, "Work,

25.

26.

27.
28.

29.

30.

31.

32.
33.
34.

35.

36.
37.
38.
39.
4o.
41.
42.
43.
44.

Culture and Society in Industrializing America,” New York, Vintage
Books, 1977.

Charles Perrow, Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay," Glenview,
Illinois, Scott, Foresman and CO., 1979.

This discussion of Marglin's position can be found in Stewart Clegg
and David Dunkerely, "Organization, Class and Control," London,
Routledge and Kegan Paul, Ltd., p. 343-344.

Stephen A. Marglin, 1974, op. cit.

Jeremy Brecher and Tim Costello, "Common Sense for Hard Times," New
York, Two Continents Publishing Group, Ltd., 1976, p. 56.

Richard Edwards, "Contested Terrain," New York, Basic Books, 1979, p.
17.

H. H. Gerth and C. W. Mills, "From Max Weber: Essays In Sociology,"
New York, Oxford University Press, 1958.

Robert J. Antonio, “Domination and Production in Bureaucracy,"
American Sociological Review, Vol. 44, NO. 6, December 1979, Pp.
845-912.

Faunce, 1981, Op. cit., chapter 4.

Faunce, op. cit., p. 133.

For a discussion of the meaning and impact of "domain assumptions",
see Gouldner, Alvin W., "The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology." New
York. Avon Books, 1970.

Harry Braverman, "Labour and Monopoly Capital," New York, Monthly
Review Press, 1974, p. 91.

Quoted in Braverman, 1974, ibid., p. 93.
Ibid., p. 99.

Ibid., p. 99.

Clawson, 1980, Op. cit., p. 265.

Ibid., p. 33.

Braverman, 1974, op. cit., p. 97.

Op. cit., p. 33.

Richard Edwards, 1979, op. cit.

This argument is made explicit in James O'Toole, "Work in America.
Report of a Special Task Force to the Secretary of Health, Education

45.

46.

47.
48.
49.
50.

51.
52.
53.

54.
55.
56.
57.
58.

59.
60.

61.
62.
63.

and Welfare," Cambridge, Mass., M.I.T. Press, 1972. This is also a
central argument in Rinehart's book, "Tyranny of Work," op. cit.

Theodore Mills, "What Is Quality of Working Life?" Labour Canada,
Minister of Supply and Service, 1981, p. 7.

The work of Elton Mayo and his associates is described in

Nicos Mouzelis, "Organization and Bureaucracy: An Analysis Of Modern
Theories," Chicago, Illinois, Aldine Publishing CO., 1967.

Perrow, 1979, op. cit., p. 91.

Ibid. p. 98

Ibid., p. 93

One of the first theorists to point out the problems of the Human
Relations approach was Harold Sheppard. See, for example,

Sheppard, Harold L., "Managerial Sociology", unpublished Ph.D. Disser-
tation, Department of Sociology, University of Wisconsin, 1948. This
is also discussed in Sheppard, Harold L., "Approaches to Conflict in
American Industrial Sociology." British Journal of Sociology, Vol. V,
1954, Pp. 324-340.

Kerr, C. quoted in Perrow, Op. cit., p. 95.

Work in America, op. cit.

Lloyd Zimpel ed., "Man Against Work," William B. Eerdmans Publishing
CO., 1974, p. 178.

Quoted in Faunce, 1981, Op. cit., p. 171.

Thomas Fitzgerald, quoted in Zimple, 1974, op. cit., p. 231.
Edwards, 1979, op. cit., p. 12.

Ibid.

Ernest Mandel, "Marxist Economic Theory. Volume One," New York,
Monthly Review Press, 1970. p. 131.

Ibid.

P. K. Edwards and Hugh Scullion, "The Social Organization of Indus-
trial Conflict," Oxford, Basil Blackwell Publisher, Ltd., 1980.

Ibid., p. 5.
Ibid., p. 7.

Steward Clegg and David Dunkerely, "Organization, Class and Control,“
London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1980, p. 513.

64.
65.

66.
67.
68.
69.

70.

71.

72.

73.
74.

75.

76.

77.
78.
79.
80.

81.

Edwards, 1979, Op. cit., p. 79.

The most blatant form of this type of control is slavery and even
here, it is extremely expensive and ineffective. Chambliss and
Seidman report that over four hundred slave revolts took place in the
United States before the Civil War. This paints a picture of active
resistance rather than passivity among these people. For a more
complete discussion of this see William Chambliss and Robert Seidman,
"Law Order and Power," Second Edition, Don Mills, Ontario,
Addison-Wesley Publishing CO., 1982, p. 79.

C. Palloix quOted in Clegg and Dunkerely Op. cit., p. 512.
Ibid., p. 134.
Ibid.

For a discussion of company unions and their affect see Hugh Beynon,
"Working for Ford," Harmondsworth, Penguin Books, 1974.

Quoted in Richard Edwards, Michael Reich and Thomas Weisskopf eds.,
“The Capitalist System," Second Edition, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972, p. 269.

R. Garlin, quoted in Zimpel, 1974, op. cit., p. 155.

Bertram Silverman and Murray Yanowitch eds., "The Worker in Post-
Industrial Capitalism," New York, The Free Press, 1974, p. 444.

Ibid.

This issue is discussed at length in Gerry Hunius, G. David Garson and
John Case eds., "Workers' Control," New York, Vintage Books, 1973.

In particular, Clegg and Dunkerely discuss the work Of Habermas in
connection with the ideology which develops from experience with
democracy. See Clegg and Dunkerely, 1980, op. cit.

David Jenkins, "QWL - Current Trends and Directions," in Issues in the
Quality of Working Life, No. 3, December, 1981, Ontario Quality of
Working Life Centre, Ontario Ministry of Labour.

Ernest Mandel, quoted in Clegg and Dunkerely, Op. cit., 522.

This argument is made by RInehart, op. cit.

Daniel Zwerdling in Zimpel, 1974, op. cit., p. 319.

Daniel Zwerdling, "Workplace Democracy,“ New York, Harper and Row,
Publishing CO., 1978, p. 8.

Carole Pateman in Hunius et. al., Op. cit., p. 469.

82.

83.

84.
85.

86.
87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

93.

Paul Blumberg, "Industrial Democracy: The Sociology of Participa-
tion,“ London, Constable and Company, 1969, p. 123.

Evidence of this sort of cooperation is visible in a number of areas
including "Perspectives on the Quality Of Working Life; Proceedings of
a Conference Hosted by the Ontario Quality of Working Life Advisory
Committee," Toronto, Ontario, Ontario Ministry of Labour, October 15,
1980. Also, this was reported in a number of issues of "OWL Agenda"
published by the Lansing Area Joint Labour-Management Committee which
showed both labour and management leaders supporting QWL programmes.
In particular see the July/August 1983 edition Of this publication.

William Quchi, “Theory 2". Avon Publishers, New York, 1981.

Martin Glaberman discusses the contradiction inherent in the Japanese
system and suggests that there is less harmony in this system than is
immediately apparent. For example, he points out the relative power-
lessness of the Japanese unions comparing them to company unions in
Great Britain earlier this century. Also, he discusses the enormous
power of the Japanese corporations in terms of their control over the
labour market. If a Japanese worker is fired from a job at a large
corporation, chances of finding comparable work in another corporation
are limited by a form of informal blacklisting which goes on between
these companies. Given the paucity of employment opportunities and
the excess labour supply, it is not surprising that there is a degree
of cooperation. However, Glaberman notes that the militancy of the
Japanese workers is increasingly as their standard of living
increases. See ”Speaking Out," Vol. 2, Summer, 1982, Detroit,
Michigan.

David Jenkins, 1981, Op. cit.

Charles A. Reich, "The Greening of America," Toronto, Ontario, Bantam
Books, 1970, p. 29.

Adam Smith quoted in Stephen A. Marglin, "What Do Bosses Do? The
Review of Radical Political Economics, Vol. 6, NO. 2, 1974, p. 37.

This point is made by Bruce Stokes, "Worker Participation - Productiv-
ity and the Quality of Working Life," Worldwatch, Paper No. 25,
December, 1975, p. 35.

The QWL material cited in this chapter takes this approach. For
example see Jenkins, 1981, Op. cit., or Mills, 1981, op. cit.

The issue of "compensation" versus "spillover" from work related
activities is discussed by both Faunce

The distinction between various sectors of the economy including the
monopoly sector is made by James O'Connor in “The Fiscal Crisis Of The
State," New York, St. Martins Press, 1970.

Rinehart discusses this thesis which is most often associated with the
work of J.H. Goldthorpe, D. Lockwood, F. Bechofer and J. Platt

94.

95.

96.
97.
98.
99.

100.

101.
102.

103.
104.

105.
106.
107.

108.

109.

110.

entitled "The Affluent Worker in the Class Structure," Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1969.

See for example Martin Meisner, "The Long Arm of the Job," in Canada:
A Sociological Profile, Second Edition, W. E. Mann ed., Toronto, Copp
Clark, Pp. 362-377.

Robert H. Lauer, "Social Problems and the Quality of Life," Second
Edition, Dubuque, Iowa, Wm. C. Brown Company, 1978. p. 314.

Ibid., p. 312.

ibid., p. 312.

James O'Toole, 1972, op. cit.

Lauer, 1978, op. cit., p. 317.

For an extensive discussion of problems related to occupational safety
and health see Charles E. Reasons, Lois L. Ross and Craig Patterson,
"Assault On The Worker," Toronto, Butterworth and CO., 1981.

Lauer, 1978, op. cit., p. 317.

See Emery, F. E. and E. L. Trist, "Socio-Technical Systems", in C. W.
Churchman and M. Verhulst, eds., "Management Science, Models and
Techniques." Vol. 2, Oxford. Pergamon Press, 1960, Pp. 83-97. See
also Emery F. E. and E. Thorsrud, "Democracy at Work." London.
Martinus Nijhoff, Social Sciences Division, 1976.

Faunce, 1981, op. cit.

Edward Lawler III quoted in , "The Quality of Working Life," Volume
One, Louis E. Davis and Albert B. Cherns and Associates eds., New
York, The Free Press, 1975, p. 124.

Faunce, 1981, op. cit., 107.

Smucker, op. cit., p. 292.

Bryant, quoted in, "Work In The Canadian Context," Katherine Lundy and
Barbara Warne Eds., Toronto, Butterworths and CO., 1981, p. xiii.

Richard Schacht, "Alienation," Garden City, New York, Doubleday and
CO., 1970, p. 74.

Alan Fox, "Themes and Issues in Modern Sociology. A Sociology of Work
in Industry," Jean Floud and John H. Goldthorpe eds., London, Collier-
MacMillan CO., 1971, p. 12. Maslow's work and its use by advocates of
OWL is also discussed by Lawler, 1975, op. cit.

Straus, quoted in, "Work and the Quality of Life," James O'Toole ed.,
Cambridge, M.I.T. Press, 1974, p. 47.

111.

112.
113.

114.

115.

116.

117.
118.
119.
120.

121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.

127.

128.

This is discussed by Faunce, 1981, Op. cit., as well as in many of the
articles which deal with the QWL approach and its advantages.

Theodore Mills, 1981, op. cit., p. 1.

A great deal of the QWL literature seems to appeal to altruistic and
humanistic concerns which are difficult to reject. The use Of
"motherhood" issues may be a viable tactic for advocates of this
approach given the types Of differences and the historical posture of
the constituencies that they have to make their appeal to.

The concept of the "definition of the situation" was developed by
W.I. Thomas and informs much of symbolic interactionist theory. A
discussion of this concept and its relation to the larger body of
theory from which it developed is presented in, "Symbolic Inter-
action," Third Edition, Jerome G. Manis and Bernard N. Meltzer eds.,
Boston, Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1978.

Rosabeth Moss Kanter, "Men and Women Of the Corporation," New York,
Basic Books, Inc., 1977, p. 10.

The importance of the notion of choice is presented throughout the
work of Chambliss and Seidman op. cit.

Taylor and Walton in Cohen, Op. cit., p. 219.

Clawson, 1980, op. cit., p. 31-37.

Op. cit., Montgomery and Gutman.

For an excellent example of this type of work see Studs Terkel,
"Working," New York, Random House, 1972. See also Garson and Brecher
and Costello, op. cit.

op. cit., Kraft, Garson.

Brecher and Costello, 1976, op. cit., p. 59.

Chambliss and Seidman, 1982, Op. cit.

Perrow, 1979, op. cit., p. 154.

Gouldner's example is presented in Perrow, 1979, op. cit.

See Gilbert Geis, "The Heavy Electrical Equipment Anti-trust Case of
1961," in "White Collar Crime," Gilbert Geis and Robert F. Meier eds.,

New York, The Free Press, 1977, Pp. 117-132.

Seymour Faber, "Working Class Organization," in Our Generation, Vol.
11, No. 3, Pp. 13-27.

Daniel Bell, "The End of Ideology," Glencoe, Illinois, The Free Press,
1960, p. 224.

129.

130.

131.
132.

133.

134.
135.
136.
137.
138.
139.
140.

141.
142.
143.
144.
145.
146.
147.

148.
149.

Donald F. Roy, "Banana Time," in Human Organization, Vol. 18, NO. 4,
1060, Pp. 158-165.

Bill Watson, "Counter-Planning on the Shop Floor," Boston, Mass., New
England Free Press, 1971.

Ibid., p. 6.

Paul Romanow and Rita Stone, "The American Worker," quoted in Faber,
1976, op. cit.

F. J. Rothlisberger and W. F. Dickson, "Management and the Worker,"
Cambridge Mass., Harvard University Press, 1947, cited in H.

F. Gardner, "Workers Reaction to the Post Office," published M.A.
Thesis, University Of Windsor, 1978.

Watson, 1971, Op. cit. p. 7.

Bell, 1960, op. cit., p. 233.

Taylor and Walton, in Cohen, Op. cit., p. 219.

Watson, 1971, op. cit.

op. cit., Faber, Roy.

op. cit., Faber.

Tullio Caputo, "School Organizational Structure and Student
Behaviour," unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of Windsor, 1978. See
also Gardner, op. cit.

This is discussed in chapter 4 of Faunce's book, Op. cit.

Ibid., p. 138.

Ibid, p. 161.

Ibid., p. 157.

Ibid., p. 157.

Ibid., p. 139.

Thomas M. Lodahl and Mathilde Kejner, "The Definition and Measurement
Of Job Involvement," in the Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 49,
NO. 1, 1965, Pp. 24-33. Also, Edward E. Lawler III and Douglas T.
Hall, "Relationship of Job Characteristics to Job Involvement, Satis-
faction and Intrinsic Motivation," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.
54, No.4, 1970, Pp. 313-315.

Ibid. Lawler and Hall, Pp. 24—25.

Ibid. Lawler and Hall.

150. Ibid. Lodahl and Kejner and Lawler and Hall.

151. M.M. Moch, “Job Involvement, Internal Motivation, and Employees'
Integration Into Networks of Work Relations,“ Organizational Behaviour

and Human Performance, 25, 1980, Pp. 15-31.
152. Ibid. Lawler and Hall, p. 307.

CHAPTER THREE

 

1.

Blissymbolics is a graphic augmentative communication system used by
people who are, for a variety of reasons, unable to communicate
verbally. It consists of a set Of graphic symbols which have meaning
in this system of communication.

Seymour Faber, "Working Class Organization," in Our Generation, Vol.
11, No. 3, 1976, Pp. 13-27.

Item 1 in this scale had high loadings on both Factor One and Factor
Three. This is understandable given the emphasis placed on good
relations with coworkers expressed in Factor One. It's inclusion in
this scale, however, rests on its use as a measure of morale. This is
reflected in its loading on Factor 3. Factor 3 is difficult to
interpret since it shows items with high loadings on a number of
dimensions of morale and a person orientation to work. In addition to
the high loadings on the item related to group interaction discussed
above, high loadings in this factor were also visible on terms which
reflect morale through the importance that people attach to work.

Michael K. Moch, "Job Involvement, Internal Motivation, and Employees'
Integration into Networks of Work Relationships," Organizational
Behaviour and Human Performance, Vol. 25, 18=980, Pp. 15-31.

William A. Faunce, "Problems of an Industrial Society," New York,
McGraw-Hill.

CHAPTER 4.

1. Richard Edwards, "Contested Terrain," New York, Basic Books, Inc.,
1979, p. 160.

2. Charles Perrow, "Complex Organizations," Second Edition, Glenview,
Illinois, Scott, Foresman and CO., 1979, p. 160.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Antonio, Robert J.
1979 "Domination and Production in Bureaucracy." American
Sociological Review. Vol. 44, No.6. December: 895-912.

Archibald, Peter W.
Theories Of Alienation. Felix Geyer and David R. Schweitzer
eds.

Archibald, Peter W.
1978 Social Psychology as Political Economy. Toronto, Ontario:
McGraw-Hill, Ryerson Limited.

Baran, Paul and Paul M. Sweezy ,
1966 MonOpOly Capital: An Essay on the American Economic and
Social Order. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Bell, Daniel
1960 The End Of Ideology. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press.

Bernstein, Paul
1976 Workplace Democratization: Its Internal Dynamics. Compara-
tive Administration Research Institute: The Kent State
University Press.

Blauner, Robert
1964 Alienation and Freedom. London: University of Chicago
Press.

Blumberg, Paul
1969 Industrial Democracy: The Sociology of Participation.
London: Constable and CO.

Bottomore, T.B. Ed.

1964 Karl Marx: Early Writings. New York: McGraw Hill.
Braverman, Harry
1974 Labor and Monopoly Capital. New York: Monthly Review
Press.

Brecher, Jeremy & Tim Costello
1976 Common Sense for Hard Times: The Power of the Powerless to
Cope with Everyday Life and Transform Society in the Nine-
teen Seventies. New York: Two Continents Publishing Group.
Ltd.

Chambliss, William and Robert Seidman
1982 Law, Order and Power. Second Edition. Don Mills, Ontario:
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Clawson, Dan
1980 Bureaucracy and the Labor Process: The Transformation of
U.S. Industry, 1860-1920. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Clegg. Stewart and David Dunkerley
1980 Organization, Class and Control. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul, Ltd.

Cohen, Stanley, Ed.
1971 Images of Deviance. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books,
Ltd.

Cote, Marcel and Visile Tega
1980 The Industrial Democracy. Montreal, Que.: Les Editions
Agence D'arc, Inc.

Davis, Louis E. and Albert B. Cherns & Associates
1975 The Quality of Working Life. Vol. #2 Cases and Commentary.
New York: The Free Press.

Deutscher, Irwin
1973 What We Say, What We DO. Glenville, Ill.: Scott, Forseman.

Dubois, Pierre
1976 Sabotage in Industry. Translated by Rosemary Sheed.
Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.

Duncan, K.D., M. M. Gruneberg and D. Wallis, Eds.
1980 Changes in Working Life. Proceedings of an International
Conference on Changes in the Nature and Quality of Working
Life. Toronto: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Edwards, P.K. and Hugh Scullion
1982 The Social Organization of Industrial Conflict: Control and
Resistance in The Work Place. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
Publisher, Ltd.

Edwards, Richard
1979 Contested Terrain: The Transformation Of the Work Place in
the Twentieth Century. New york: Basic Books, Inc.

Edwards, Richard C., Michael Reich and Thomas E. Weisskopf
1972 The Capitalist System: A Radical Analysis of American
Society. Second Edition. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Faunce, William A.
1981 Problems of an Industrial Society. New York: McGraw-Hill
Book CO.

Floud, Jean and John H. Goldthorpe Eds.
1971 Alanfox, Themes and Issues in Modern Sociology. A Sociology
of Work in Industry. London: Collier-MacMillan Co.

Fromm, Erich
1961 Marx's Concept of Man. With a Translation from Marx's
Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts by T.B. Bottomore.
New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Co.

Gardner, H.F.
1978 Workers Raction to the Post Office. Unpublished M.A.
Thesis. University of Windsor.

Garson, Barbara
1975 All the Livelong Day. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.

Gerth, H.H. and C.W. Mills
1958 From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. New York: Oxford
University Press.

Guest, Robert H.
1982 "Innovative Work Practices." Work in America Institute
Studies in Productivity. New York: Pergamon Press, Inc.

Gutman, Herbert
1977 Work, Culture and Society in Industrializing America. New
York: Vintage Books.

Hackman, Richard J. and Mary Dean Lee
1979 Redesigning Work: A Strategy for Change. Highlights of the
Literature. Work in America Institute Studies in
Productivity. Scarsdale, New York: Work in America, Inc.

Hill, Stephen
1981 Competition and Control at Work: The New Industrial Soci-
ology. Cambridge, Mass.: The M.I.T. Press.

Hunnius, Gerry, G. David Garson and John Case Eds.
1973 Workers' Control: A Reader on Labor and Social Change. New
York: Vintage Books.

Isarael, J.
1971 Alienation from Marx to Modern Sociology: A Malro-
Sociological Analysis. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Jamieson, Stuart
1971 Times of Trouble: Labour Unrest and Industrial Conflict in
Canada, 1900-66. Ottawa: Information Canada.

Jenkins, Daivd
1981 "Current Trends and Directions“ Issues in the Quality Of
Working Life. No.3, December. Ontario Ministry Of Labour.

Johnson, Walter. Ed.
1975 Working in Canada. Montreal, Que.: Black Rose Books, Ltd.

Kanter Moss, Rosa Beth
1977 Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books,
Inc.

Kanungo, Rabindra, N.
1982 Work Alienation: An Integrative Approach. New York:
Praeger Publishers.

Kraft, Philip

1979 "The Industrialization of Computer Programming: From
Pro ramming to 'Software Production'", in Andrew Zimbalist
(edl, Case Studies on the Labour Process. New York:
Monthly Review Press. Pp. 1-17.

Kraft, Philip

1977 Programmers and Managers, The Routinization of Computer
Programming in the United States. New York: Springer-
Verlag.
Kochan, Thomas A., Daniel J.B. Mitchell and Lee Dyer (Eds.)
1982 Industrial Relations Research in the 1970's: Review and
Appraisal. Industrial Relations Research Association
Series.

Lauer, Robert H.
1978 Social PRoblems and the Quality of Life. Second Edition.
Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers.

Lee, Alfred M.
1972 "An Obituary for Alienation" in Social Forces Vol. 20,
Summer. Pp. 121-127.

Lichtman, Richard

1970 An Outline of Marxism. Toronto: Forum House Publishing
Company.
Lischeron, J.A. and T. 0. Wall
Dec. "Employee Participation: An Experimental Field Study."
1975 Human Relations. Pp. 863-884.

Lundy, Katherine and Barbara Warme
1981 Work in the Canadian Context: Continuity Despite Change.
Toronto: Butterworths and Co. Canada, Ltd.

Mandel, Ernest
1970 Marxist Economic Theory. Vol. 1. New York: Monthly Review
Press.

Marglin, Stephen A.
Summer, "What do Bosses Do? The Origins and Functions Of Hierarchy
1974 Capitalist Production." The Review of Radical Political
Economics. Vol. 6, No.2, Pp. 33-60.

Mars, Gerald
1982

Marx, Karl
1968

Marx, Karl
1967

Marx, Karl and
1947

Meissner, M.
1971

Meltzer, Loren
1978

Cheats At Work: An Anthropology of Work Place Crime.
London: Unwin Paperbacks.

Capital. Volume One. In Marx-Engels Reader. Robert C.
Tucker, Ed. New York: W.W. Norton and Co. Inc.

The Economic and Phildsophic Manuscripts (1844) Writings Of
The Young Marx on Philosophy and Society. Lloyd 0. Easton
and Kurk H. Guddat. Eds. New York: Anchor Books.

Frederick Engels
The German Ideology: Part One. C.J. Arthur Ed. New York:
International Publishers, CO., Inc.

"The Longarm of the Job: Social Participation and the
Constraints of Industrial Work", in Canada: A Sociological
Profile, 2nd Edition, Edited by W.E. Mann. Toronto: Copp
Clark. Pp. 362-377.

Worker Alienation: Highlights Of the Literature. Work in
America Institute Studies in Productivity. (Scarsdale, New
York: Work in America, Inc.

Miller, Richard B. (Ed.)

1977

Mills, T.
April
1975

M. M. Moch
1980

Participative Management Quality of Work Life and Job
Enrichment. Park Ridge, New Jersey: Noyes Data Corpora-
tion.

"Human Resources - Why the New Concern?" Harvard Business
Review. Pp. 120-134.

"Job Involvement, Internal Motivation, and Employees Inte-
gration into Networks of Work Relationships," Organizational

 

Behaviour and Human Performance. 25, Pp. 15-31.

 

Montgomery, David

1979

Workers' Control in America: Studies in the History of
Work, Technology, and Labor Struggles. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Mouzelis, Nicos P.

1967

Organization and Bureaucracy: An Analysis of Modern The-

ories. Chicago, Ill.: Aldine Publishing Co.

O'Connor, James
1975 "Productive vs. Unproductive Labor." Politics and Society,
Vol. 5, No.3. '

Ollman, Bertell
1971 Alienation: Mary's Conception of Man in Capitalistic
Society. Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press.

O'Toole, James Ed.
1974 Work and the Quality of Life: Resource Papers for Work in
America. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.

O'Toole, J.
1972 Work in America. Report of a Special Task Force to the
Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Cambridge,
Mass.: M.I.T. Press.

Quchi, William G.
1981 "Theory 2: How American Business Can Meet The Japanese
Challenge." New York: Avon Publishers Inc.

Parness, Steven
1978 Productivity and the Quality of Working Life. Highlights of
the Literature. Work in America Institute Studies in
Productivity. Scarsdale, New York: Work in America Insti-
tute, Inc.

Perrow, Charles
1979 Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay. Glenview,
Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Co.

Reasons, Charles E., Lois L. Ross and Craig Paterson
1981 Assault on the Worker: Occupational Health and Safety in
Canada. Toronto: Butterworth and CO., Ltd.

Reich, Charles A.
1970 The Greening of America. Toronto, Ont.: Bantam Books of
Canada, Ltd.

Reich, Wilhelm

1972 Sex-Pol Essays 1929-34. Lee Baxandall (Ed.), Vintage Books.
Rinehart, James W.
1975 The Tyranny of Work. Don Mills, Ontario: Academic Press
Canada.

Rinehart, J., Susan Wheller and Seymour Faber
1976 Our Generation, Vol. 11, No.3, Summer.

Romanow, Paul and Rita Stone
Summer The American Worker in Faber, Seymour. Working Class
1976 Organization. Our Generation, Vol. II, No.3.

Rosenberg, Michael M., Robert A. Stebbins and Allan Turdwetz
1982 The Sociology of Deviance. New York: St. Martin's Press,
Inc.

Rothlisberger, F. J. and William F. Dickson
1947 Management and the Worker. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press. Cited in Garner, H.F. Workers Reaction to
the Post Office. Unpublished M.A. Thesis. University of
Windsor.

Roy, Donald F.
1960 "Bananatime: Jobs Satisfaction and Informal Interaction"
Human Organizations, Vol 18, No.4, Pp. 158-165.

Schacht, R.

1970 Alienation. Garden City: New York, Double Day and Company,
Inc.
Seeman, M.
1959 "On the Meaning of Alienation". American Sociological

Review. Vol. 24. Pp. 783-791.

Silverman, Bertram and Murray Yanowitch (Eds.)
1974 The Worker in "Post-Industrial" Capitalism: Liberal and
Radical Responses. New York: The Free Press.

Simon, Herbert A
1976 Administrative Behaviour: A Study of Decision-Making
Processes in Administrative Organization. Third Edition.
New York: The Free Press.

Smucker, Joseph
1980 Industrialization in Canada. Scarborough, Ont.:
Prentice-Hall of Canada, Ltd.

Stokes, Bruce
Dec. Worker Participation - Productivity and the Quality of Work
1978 Life. Worldwatch Paper 25.

Stone, Katherine
1974 "The Origins of Job Structures in the Steel Industry." The
Review of Radical Political Economics. Vol. 6, No.2.
Summer Pp. 61-97.

Tepperman, Jean
1976 Not Servants, Not Machines. Boston: Beacon Press.

Terkel, Studs
1972 Working. New York: Random House.

Vanek, Jaroslav (Ed.)
1975 Self-Management: Economic Liberation of Man. Selected
Readings. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, Ltd.

Watson, Bill
1971

Watson, Bill
1971

Weber, Max
1947

Wilson, H.B.
1974

Witte, John F.
1980

“Counter-Planning on the Shop Floor". Boston, Mass.: New
England Free Press.

"Counter-Planning on the Shop Floor". Boston, Mass.: New
England Free Press.

The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, Translated
by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. New York: The Free
Press.

Democracy and the Workplace. Montreal, Que.: Black Rose
Books, Ltd.

Democracy, Authority, and Alienation in Work: Workers'
Participation in an American Corporation. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.

Zimpel, Lloyd (Ed.)

1974

Man Against Work. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Zwerdling, Daniel

1978

Workplace Democracy: A Guide to Workplace Ownership,
Participation and Self-Management Experiments in United
States and Europe. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, Inc.