Management Divided: Contradictions of Labor Management By MattVidal. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2022, vi + 368, ISBN: 9780198795278, Price $100, hardback.

The study of work and labour is approached from a range of methodological perspectives, and Industrial Relations (IR) is among the most dominant of them. It is not redundant to say that IR practitioners — in public and private sector organizations and the academy — have faith in the utility of established, legal frameworks for labour–management cooperation and conflict resolution. In contrast, much of the labour studies community is of sceptical of the benefits that the structures of collective bargaining are thought to bring workers, and hostile towards labour–management cooperation. Matt Vidal is a Reader in Sociology and Political Economy at Loughborough University, and he clearly supports an IR approach to dealing with organizational change. His analysis in this book is comprehensive but it will raise as many questions as it answers, depending on the audience that reads it. Management Divided: Contradictions of Labor is divided into four sections, and then further subdivided into ten chapters. Vidal's research is based on field work that he completed in manufacturing locations in the United States, and they included both unionized and non-unionized firms. He sees an inherent contradiction in management methods between the need to ensure workplace discipline while fostering worker creativity, and this in turn divides management practice. Vidal examines the impact of lean production methods, while referencing the work of other writers, such as Richard Florida and James Rinehart. Some readers may question his interpretation of the legacy of the ever-controversial Frederick Winslow Taylor. Vidal believes that lean production is ultimately beneficial for workers and employers, while acknowledging its deficiencies, and describes places where it was introduced such as the former New United Motor Manufacturing Incorporated (NUMMI) joint venture between Toyota and General Motors. He is correct that there are some places where lean management and associated practices like Kaizen have worked. Using them has certainly benefited Japanese manufacturing firms for decades. There are nonetheless many other cases where it has failed, including the CAMI joint venture in Canada between General Motors and Suzuki. Vidal's description of lean's origins is helpful, such as identifying John Krafcik is the devisor of the term ‘lean production’ to describe Toyota's manufacturing method. This book links to other work that Vidal has published on labour–management cooperation, and he recently took to the pages of the journal Catalyst to respond to a critique of his positions written by Herman Rosenfeld. Vidal is firm in his assertion that conditional labour–management cooperation in the workplace will improve the position of workers and their unions on the job. The methodology that he uses in Management Divided is sound, and he did devote a lot of effort to talking to managers, workers and union representatives on the job. There are nonetheless some challenges with his analysis. There is considerable research on the negative impact that lean production has on workers. For instance, Darius Mehri was employed by Toyota in Japan and described the experience in Notes from Toyota-land: An American Engineer in Japan. In Mehri's analysis, Toyota — the creator of lean production — was portrayed as perhaps the last company where anyone would want to work. The level of labour–management cooperation required to make lean production beneficial for workers is enormously difficult to achieve. That is the reason why the CAMI joint venture in Canada experienced a relatively fast breakdown in workplace cooperation followed by a strike, and why General Motors’ Saturn assembly plant in Spring Hill, Tennessee eventually became like the other factories operated by the company before the new Saturn brand was eventually discontinued. Workplace cooperation between labour and management is fraught with peril for unions. Union members often think that cooperation means a greater voice in daily business operations and will accordingly direct their frustrations with it at their local leaders, while middle- and front-line management can feel that they are losing what limited authority they possess. It seems almost inevitable that conflict will occur in the most well-intentioned labour–management partnerships. There is also the problem of how much emphasis senior management actually places on getting along with workers, unless faced with labour shortages. Vidal's focus on manufacturing is both the strength and weakness of his analysis. Lean management is now found everywhere and assessing its real impact means looking at how it affects industries other than manufacturing. The recent COVID-19 pandemic has certainly provided some insights, as lean production helped create global supply chains that proved to be fragile and difficult to restart once they were stopped. Precarious work — identified with the Gig Economy — is a defining feature of the twenty-first century economy and it also needs to be included in any analysis of lean management methods. Those global supply chains that buckled during the COVID-19 pandemic rely on a lot of precarious, gendered and racialized labour. Lean management methodology is now across the vast service sector as much as it is on factory floors. Matt Vidal gives readers much to think about with this book, even if many of them may be looking for him to go further with his analysis. Management Divided will hopefully inform future work on the impact of lean management, and it is important that the IR and labour studies fields continue to write about and debate it. There is an ongoing need for analysis on the way that capitalism shapes work. As Vidal notes, while challenging Michael Burawoy, people are already conditioned to accept capitalism before they enter workplaces. There is also likely never going to be a definitive narrative on lean management. Its origins and impact are too consequential to ignore.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.