From formal to informal: executives who migrated to flexible work.
| Autor | Kim, Han Na |
1 Introduction
Since the late 1970s, the flexible forms of employment contract have been concentred on investigations about the impact of flexible working arrangements both in organizational outcomes such as in the actual performance of workers (Baltes, Briggs, Huff, Wright, & Neuman, 1999; Hill, Hawkins, Ferris, & Weitzman, 2001; Kossek, Lautsch, & Eaton, 2006; Pierce & Dunham, 1992; Rubin, 1979; Russell, O'Connell, & McGinnity, 2009; Stains & Pleck, 1986, some examples). These studies ended up consolidating an ideology excessive in relation to the general understanding of this type of work (Anderson & Kelliher, 2009; Barley & Kunda, 2006), since the discussion focused on flexible contracts as a phenomenon only described in terms of the characteristics of labour market and companies (Galea, Houkes, & Rijk, 2014; Green, Kler, & Leeves, 2010; Greenberg & Landry, 2011).
Considering that the previous research's focus argued the flexible work solely in terms of firms and markets, and this kind of focus constrains our ability to perceive, understand and shape the evolution of system of work and employment (Barley & Kunda, 2006), this article aims to fill this theoretical gap. Using a constructionist approach were investigated 30 Brazilian executives who decided to migrate from formal employment contracts to more flexible formats. All these professionals had already held top management positions in Brazilian and multinational companies, but they decided to work in flexible activities. So, what behaviour changes were necessary for formal executives migrate to flexible work? To answer this question, we describe flexible forms of work in the next section; following the methodology design and then the results obtained in this research.
2 Globalization and Changes in the Organization of Work
Many contemporary authors try and explain the changes that occurred in the social, economic and political scenario that led to the current shape of global and local markets (Antunes, 2013; Azevedo, Tonelli, & Silva, 2015; Bauman, 1999, 2001; Beck, 1999; Castells, 2007; Chahad, 2003; Giddens, 1991; Harvey, 1992; Heloani, 2003; Russell et al., 2009; Wood, 1992). But the conceptual lack of definition of globalization has made it difficult to have a broader and more consistent debate on this question. This difficulty largely arises from the fact that, as Bauman (1999) indicates, the very term 'globalization' was created to get around countless orthodox truths and, therefore, it ended up becoming an unquestionable expression.
The globalization is certainly the most widely used word of the last few years, because it is politically effective, however many different meanings it has (Beck, 1999). In other words, the term globalization has been used as an allencompassing discursive resource that accepts multiple considerations, depending on the intention and situation in which it is used. But the idea of globalization fosters the existence of three main myths: (i) the myth of incomprehensibility, which is an understanding that it is difficult to comprehend what is happening in today's world; (ii) the myth of service provision, which is the idea that growth in the service sector is going to save the work society; and (iii) the myth of costs, which fosters the need to drastically reduce salaries, as an alternative to solving the problem of unemployment (Beck, 1999).
The myth of service provision still lacks more convincing proof. The myth of incomprehensibility transmits much more recognition that life in society is complex, per se. It is, therefore, merely applied as a convenient way of giving a label to the difficulties that are inherent in the transformations being experienced on a global scale. Finally, there is a certain illusion surrounding the myth of costs, seeing that more and more people have a doctrinal conviction that "only radical labour and salary cost action can put an end to the spectre of unemployment" (Beck, 1999, p.115).
The fact is that people coming from the most diverse regions, contexts and countries are experiencing very similar impacts in their lives because of the global transformations in society. It is in this sense that globalization makes the connection between local and global strengthening the social relations and the experiences of collective dramas. This interdependence is driven by advances in communication technology, information and transportation, as far as concerns elements such as advanced financial management computer systems, on-line operations management, flexible production, air transportation services, mobility infrastructure and the Internet (Castells, 2007; Giddens, 1991; Menezes, 2011).
It is no coincidence that this cycle of interdependence in the information age means that it is possible to find and create new jobs and ways of working, but the costs of these alternatives are susceptible to constant changes (Anderson & Kelliher, 2009; Brandi, 2012; Findlay, Kalleberg, & Warhurst, 2013). For example, many companies in advanced capitalist countries move part of their operations to countries where labour charges are less costly. According to Batt (2005), changes in the organization of work, mainly because of technological advances and the division of labour, are proof of the concern of the area of organizational studies to debate the changes that have occurred in the contemporary employment system based on the post-Fordist production model.
Moreover, contemporary work activities can be exported, while individuals manage to establish cooperation regimes in transnational and transcontinental schools, or even supply their labour through services measured by direct contact with consumer-customers (Beck, 1999). Organizations that work transnationally can organize their work and production processes by distributing it to regions in which production costs and labour charges are less costly (Chahad, 2003). This strategic alternative provides an organizational flexibility that maximizes the response of agents and economic units (Castells, 2007). Flexibility in the organization of work makes it obvious that globalization has intensified the bargaining power of businesspeople, since the owners of capital are finding more and more room for defining the rules of the labour market and the business logic in favour of growing financial returns (Bauman, 1999; Beck, 1999).
This scenario has contributed to trade unions and individuals look at flexibility of work organization as a form of precariousness (Azevedo et al., 2015; Barley & Kunda, 2006; Brandi, 2012; Calvacante & Predes, 2010; Dedecca, 2006; Faria & Rachid, 2006; Kremer & Faria, 2005; Menezes, 2011; Piccinini, Oliveira, & Rubeich, 2006), which result in situation like: salary cuts, the abolition of laws that protect worker salaries and problems involving labour negotiations with less well-qualified professionals (Anderson & Kelliher, 2009; Chahad, 2003; Menezes, 2011).
In fact, before long, the flexible forms of work gained momentum and showed applicable to the situation. There was the reduction in stable and fulltime employment in favour of a series of ways of working, whose common denominator was flexibilization in terms of contracts, time, space and organizational charters. Flexible forms of working gained in strength at the time because they proved to be applicable and appropriate. As a result, because flexible working is embedded in the movement for restructuring production processes and the labour market, its spread has hastened the breakdown, dispersion and fragmentation of the organization of contemporary labour (Azevedo et al., 2015; Findlay et al., 2013; Green et al., 2010; Kovacs, 2004; Menezes, 2011; Piccinini et al., 2006).
Given these circumstances, individuals had to find alternative means of exercising their office in life and thus manage to preserve a place in the globalized labour market. As a result, many traditional workers launched themselves into flexible working activities, by which they managed to perform, as Beck (1999) indicates, the social role of a professional who is independent of organizational precepts. In order to be able to detail the characteristics of flexible work there now follow arguments on the subject.
3 Flexible Work
To present the inherent characteristics of flexible work, first its link with traditional work needs to be recognized. Globally, no specific limitations have been established on the characteristics of work in traditional or flexible regimes. However, a formal employment contract between a company and its employees in Brazil is governed by the rules of the Consolidation of the Labour Laws (CLT) In this case, formal contracts commonly comprise elements such as: fixed remuneration; a workplace supplied by the employer; there is no predetermined relationship period; the employee works fulltime in compliance of the contract; and the employee dedicates to working for a single employer. As showed by international researchers, this is the model that organized formal work in other countries (see, for instance, Cappelli, 1995; Gallagher & Parks, 2001; Green et ah, 2010; Greenberg & Landry, 2011; Kalleberg, 2000).
Taking into consideration what formal employment contracts are, a flexible contract is considered to be any type of working relationship that does not comply with the criteria of a traditional labour relationship (Gallagher & Parks, 2001; Greenberg & Landry, 2011). The notion of flexibility requires a redistribution of power between the organization and worker, which implies an intention on the part of individuals to appropriate the resistance capacity of organizations, whose rigidity is ready to be overcome, when they become involved with professionals who have flexible employment contracts (Azevedo et al., 2015; Bauman, 1999; Faria & Rachid, 2006; Galea et ah, 2014; Giannikis & Mihail, 2011; Green et al., 2010; Stavrou & Kilaniotis, 2010).
The studies on flexible work intensified after...
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃOCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
