The Competitive Status of the U.S. Auto Industry A Study of the Influences of Technology in Determining International Industrial Competitive Advantage (1982) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
7 Jobs and People: The Impact of Workforce Management on Competition
7 Jobs and People: The Impact of Workforce Management on Competition
Pages 109-121
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 109... ...
It has always been obvious that people were a necessary part of the business, but the Japanese have driven home the point that the work force can be a key weapon in the competitive arsenal. And it is not only in the innate talents of individuals that competitive advantage lies but also in the ability to coordinate and direct those talents, to create a work force capable of outstanding performance.
|
From page 110... ...
While much public discussion of work innovation has been concerned with workers on the assembly line, salaried and managerial personnel and indirect production workers now constitute a large fraction of the industry's work f orce. Bringing change to the management of salaried and managerial personnel involves a somewhat different set of issues than change among production workers represented by the United Auto Workers (UAW)
|
From page 111... ...
To ensure the most effective use of the vast resources embodied in equipment, the auto firms developed an increasingly hierarchical, bureaucratic organization. In managing the large numbers of people at the plant level, for example, the wage structure was rationalized to reflect the skill content of jobs, and policies for hiring and transferring people were formalized.3 Thus, long before the advent of unionization, an individual worker's employment relationship with the company was structured by r ules, standards, and procedures.
|
From page 112... ...
While a full analysis of the origins of the management structure and process is beyond the scope of this study, one thing is clear: the organization f irms chose to manage the evolving process technology, and the technology itself put a considerable distance between the average worker and the competitive fortunes of the enterprise.4 The close relationship between the craftsman and the product, a relationship mediated by pride of craftsmanship and involvement in some aspects of design and planning, was gradually replaced by a relationship whose principle nexus was cash. THE UNION-MANAGEMENT RELATIONSHIP Changes in technology have continued to influence the character of work and the employment relationship in automobile production, most notably through massive automation in the late 1950s.
|
From page 113... ...
underscored the ability of an organized work force to exert control over operations. In this context, it is no surprise that Alfred Sloan, Chairman of GM, would resist organization and no surprise that he would refer to the union leaders as "labor dictators." Writing to employees in January 1937 in response to UAW demands, Sloan posed the fundamental issues as he saw them: Will a labor organization run the plants of General Motors Corporation or will the management continue to do so?
|
From page 114... ...
The organizing effort of the 1930s and the collective bargain , O ing contracts that grew out of it made explicit an adversarial relationship that had begun to form in the interaction of technology and the organization chosen to manage the technology in the early years of the industry. Furthermore, the bitterness of the struggle and the ideology that infused it obviously influenced the character of the new institutions (negotiations, grievance procedures, shop steward/foreman relations)
|
From page 115... ...
Neither the competitive situation nor managerial organizational strategy placed a premium on loyalty or commitment. Production objectives required people to operate the equipment, but as long as minimum standards were met (and supervisors ensured they were)
|
From page 116... ...
to be used as bargaining chips for reduced workloads that plant management buys off in order to avoid disruption. At the same time, supervisors, under pressure to get production and improve efficiency, harass people to get results, which creates opportunities for more grievances.
|
From page 117... ...
What is the potential for successful change? We have already noted the efforts at GM to introduce organizational development and "Quality of Work Life" programs in production operations.
|
From page 118... ...
Indeed, research at GM and elsewhere has shown that even at the plant level, improvements in workforce management and performance require a commitment and leadership from the top plant and union officials and involvement and organizational change among staff and line middle managers. A similar conclusion about commitment applies to the corporation as a whole.
|
From page 119... ...
When one kind of pressure is absent, firms are less likely to engage in a fundamental examination of the operation of the enterprise. That kind of rethinking of the basic premises of the organizational strategy appears to be a key aspect of successful change.
|
From page 120... ...
120 V ce .o cd .= o m U
|
From page 121... ...
121 NOTES 1. A particularly clear statement of this view was articulated in the 1980 Fiat Annual Report.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.