Customer Reviews

The Corrosion of Character: The Personal Consequences of Work in the New Capitalism

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

Amidst the cacophony about the wonders of globalization and the new millennium's everlasting prosperity and bull market, Richard Sennett has the intellectual courage to present some of the negative consequences of global capitalism on a vast number of workers whose skills and dedication the economy and markets depend upon. Jobs are replaced by "projects" and "fields of work" and the moto for organizing working time is "no long-term". As workers are forced to go from one job to another, the new capitalism increases the risk of the workers in choosing employment, while it robs them of the sense of security enjoyed previously and, in Sennett's words, corrodes their character. The book covers the trends and nuances of the new capitalism and with many examples illustrates the decline of job security of both workers and managers, the fact that the fastest growing sector of the labor force is those working on temporary jobs, often called "permatemps", and that the frequent turnover in employment increases the risk of choosing a career or even a job. Richard Sennett correctly concludes that the new order does indeed corrode the worker's character.

London School Of Economic's Richard Sennett (no relation to Mack Sennett of Keystone Kops fame) has written an important and eminently readable short book (a long essay, really) about the personal consequences of work in the "new capitalism."

His book, titled THE CORROSION OF CHARACTER (1998), explains in clear and compelling terms how things have changed for the worse in the workplace, and how this has affected workers negatively.

Sennett begins by explaining how personal character is attacked by the "new capitalism". He states that routine was an evil of the old capitalism, and that in recent times, the workplace was made "flexible" by means of the restructuring of time (flextime, part time jobs, increased use of swing and graveyard type shifts, etc.). He then asserts that modern forms of labor are difficult to understand (he calls them "illegible"), and implies, persuasively, that the very murkiness of these new forms has enabled employers to victimize employees in new ways.

Author Sennett goes on to discuss the subject of risk, much ballyhooed and heavily sold as a good thing in recent times. Sennett disagrees. He states that risk-taking has become disorienting and depressing in today's world and workplace. Sennett goes on to say that the work ethic has changed for the worse, and that workers have become enmired in inevitiable and depressing failure. He describes the various ways workers caught in all this have tried unsuccessfully to cope with failure, and seems to be headed for a sad ending to his book.

However, the last chapter of THE CORROSION OF CHARACTER offers some hope. It is titled "The Dangerous Pronoun," and in it, Richard Sennett explains why community is the best remedy for the ills of work people presently suffer on such a wide and unrelieved basis (despite all the politicians' claims of how wonderful everything at present because Wall Street and its stock market are doing very well).

This is a brilliant book. Everybody should read it and encourage others to do the same. Author Ralph Keyes of Yellow Springs, Ohio, wrote a similarly brilliant book in 1972 titled WE THE LONELY PEOPLE, also calling for more, not less, community in American life. Keyes book made a big splash and started Keyes on a career as a big time author. But his book went out of print, and is now largely forgotten. This is a shame. It was Keyes' best book (and Keyes wrote many good ones thereafter).

Richard Sennett has written a wonderful book about an important subject. Only time will tell if people are intelligent enough to listen, and move appropriately to make the corrections he calls for.

Richard Sennett takes a very interesting look at the changing workplace and the possible links to its changes. He looks at the effects that the new workplace has taken on people's lives and their families. He gives vivid comparisons between the past generations and how character had its effect in their jobs and how today's jobs have an effect on character. Sennett doesn't just take a 90's perspective, but instead looks into the past at what the motivations and goals of the workers were centuries before. In 1972 Sennett wrote a book, along with Jonathan Cobb, called "The Hidden Injuries of Class". The book is about a man named Enrico who was a janitor. Enrico's job was both routine and not very mentally challenging. The reason that he was content with his job was because he had goals to improve the lives of his children. His vision canceled out most of the mental and physical drain that his job entailed. He also looks back at when most jobs were what he calls "routine" and what people thought of about habitual labor.

Diderot believed that routine labor was good. He thought that the repetitive actions enabled the worker to become an expert and increasingly develop their skills. He explained that in a factory if each worker were to become an expert at their individual task, that the result would be the best possible product produced at the best possible efficiency. Adam Smith had different views. He believed that routine work "deadened the mind." Sennett points out that today the world has followed Smith's ideas. Pride among the workers has dissipated. When a person starts from the bottom and works to the top they appreciate what they have earned and what they have produced. Today the goal is to skip or zoom past the earning stage. Who can get to the top the fastest is the grand prize. Loyalty between the company and the employees isn't visible anymore because many people don't look at what they can offer, but instead at what they want to receive. People's interests are with themselves and sometimes respectively so. Why would someone today have loyalties with a company if they know that they are not valued by that company? The workers know that they are simply a tool that can be replaced with the twist of a wrench. Sennett explains why people don't see the "long-term" and what some of the factors are that have influenced change.

Enrico's son Rico now has most everything that Enrico dreamed for him. He attended college, has a well paying job, and lives comfortably in a New York suburb. Enrico failed to realize that the discipline and experience that he gained, through hard work, was very necessary. By sending Rico to college with Enrico's own money never gave Rico the appreciation of attending the University. Today it is a very common occurrence for parents to pay for their children's tuition. Yet, there is little way around this dilemma. The children need to stay in school to learn so they will be ready for college. To have kids work enough to pay for college is not very realistic. Many people feel that they need to attend college to stay current with the changing times so they can find a good paying job. Technology has had a large part in these changing times. It is the leader while the businesses and companies run, dart, and leap to catch up.

Sennett recognizes that in today's workplace one must be very flexible. Companies need to be light on their feet and able to adapt to quick changes. The world economy and business techniques have changed very similar to how armies have changed. The strongest castle or the longest trench used to be huge advantages. Now all a nation needs is a nuclear weapon and they are a threat. Business is the same way in that the size of the company isn't what makes them strong, but instead the unique ideas and ability to stay afloat with the waves of change. Rico is pawn in this game. He has certain skills but they will only be useful for so long. He had to move four times in fourteen years. He realizes that his skills are only needed for a certain period of time, so he has no loyalty to his job or what he is providing. All of this leaves scars on his personal character. He finds himself feeling dumb when he tries to explain to his children about commitment. His commitment to his family is weak so for him to try and explain about this value doesn't work because it doesn't come from the heart. Commitment isn't part of a fast pace, "short-term" society.

Sennett does a terrific job at showing why people are unhappy with themselves even though they have good paying jobs. He gives evidence that money isn't what makes people happy. Enrico was a very content man for many reasons. He was very organized, he had goals, a family with whom he could spend time with, and a job that wasn't the best but paid enough so that he could support his family. I think that he successfully showed that a person has control over their own character through the decisions that they make. Sometimes people don't see that they have a choice because they are blinded by an outside controlling factor such as greed. By Andy Sweeney and Mike Duvall

Richard Sennetts book entitled The Corrosion of Character: The Personal Consquences of Work in the New Capitalism is a well written and informative book about the economic changes and conditions going on in America's workplace today. Sennett uses examples in his book about janitors, IBM workers, and Boston bakers as case studies to get some of his points accross. He paints a picture of how each of these professions has changed over the years. These examples are deeply thought out and explained in detail. He even makes the examples so easy to understand that even a young adult can follow along. The only downside to his book is that the author gives no soloutions to the problems inour changing workforce. He just explains why things are the way they are. If you are intrested in learning about the changes in our workforce, this is a book for you.

I wanted to enjoy this book--the subject of modern downsizing fascinates and compels me and there's been a number of solid books recently on the subject...but this isn't one of them. I was misled into believing that on THIS topic, at least, Sennett would be more clear and easier to understand than in those previous books of his which I've read and found highly incomprehensible. His case studies are sketchy, his conclusions are cliched, and his ultimate point is lost in obscurity. Instead, try reading Barbara Rudolph's "Disconnected" for a more personal, accessible look at the subject.

Perhaps the most interesting of Sennett's ideas involve the concept of evolution of self. He argues that the new Capitalism of the global economy of change doesn't provide us with a satisfactory model for living. Deeply-rooted core values like loyalty, sacrifice, authority, community, and dependence on others are chipped away bit by bit through the actions, attitudes, and machinations of the "flexible corporation". Loyalty is outmoded, generosity outdated, long-term vision outmaneuvered. Drawing on his experiences, direct and indirect, with IBM, New York advertising agencies, and the upper echelons of the Business elite, he paints a disturbing and thought-provoking portrait of work gone awry. In his words, the critical question of character is "Who needs me?" While this question may appear trite at first, consider how irrelevant it is to the modern workplace, or even to society today. Now consider how relevant it should be. Whether you agree with him or not, reading this book will challenge you to clarify your own thoughts on what work means, and should mean, both to the individual and to society as a whole.

Discusses features of the modern workplace that tend to corrode the character of the worker. Although the argument is occasionally muddy, and the citations occasionally gratuitous, "Corrosion" is an interesting take on the modern workplace from a leftist sociologist. It has an unexpectedly personal and sympathetic tone--and an occasional unexpected touch of humor as well: "She possessed that combination of human indifference and bodily cleanliness I associate with Californian culture (p. 78)."

What is character? "Character is expressed by loyalty and mutual commitment, or through the pursuit of long-term goals, or by the practice of delayed gratification for the sake of a future end. . . . Character concerns the personal traits which we value in ourselves and for which we seek to be valued by others (p. 10)."

Mr. Sennett argues that the modern workplace corrodes character by destroying the sense of temporal continuity necessary to develop a cohesive sense of one's social relations: "How can mutual loyalties and commitments be sustained in institutions which are constantly breaking apart or continually being redesigned (p. 10)?"

Workers of the era immediately following WWII understood their lives in the context of a linear narrative explaining their development and ultimate destination. Modern workers have only a succession of relatively brief jobs or project stints with between them no continuity as to either the place or the participants. "Reengineering" and flexible specialization of production impose disruptive structural change on business organization in response to consumer demand.

The leading lights of the modern capitalistic enterprise extol two traits: (1) absence of temporal attachment--a willingness to let go of the past and move on and (2) tolerance of fragmentation--the ability to pursue multiple goals simultaneously and live amid disorder.

Mr. Sennett believes, however, that these same traits that make for success at the top of the corporate hierarchy destroy "those who work lower down in the flexible regime (p. 63)." As an example, he cites a group of workers who operate complex bread-making machinery by means of an abstract computer interface. Having computer literacy as their only real "skill," they do not consider themselves bakers. Instead they see themselves moving soon to other types of employment. Most of them are also working only part-time at the bakery, concurrently working or studying elsewhere. They exhibit the prized traits, yet they derive relatively lower pay and esteem than the unionized craft bakers who worked in their place twenty-five years previously.

These traits are also destructive in encouraging workers to risk job changes that usually leave them worse off than before. They tend further to devalue past experience, leaving middle-aged workers vulnerable to layoff and to irrational fears of their own obsolescence.

These traits have contributed to the development of a society characterized by "demeaning superficialities." The traditional work ethic is particularly challenged by superficiality. Disciplined use of time and delayed gratification seem incongruous virtues in a workplace that does not promise even its own persistence past the end of the month.

The modern work ethic emphasizes instead "teamwork," and according to Mr. Sennett, "Teamwork is the group practice of demeaning superficiality (p. 99)." Teamwork in the modern workplace is a sham, consisting primarily of acting roles whose lines are prescribed "friendly" phrases.

In the new capitalism loss of employment awaits an ever-growing number of once secure middle-class workers. Mr. Sennett finds that workers who develop a sense of career, a narrative explaining their professional development, might be able to fortify themselves against the bewilderment of being laid off, but they will still not be able to "go forward." After layoff, they tend to withdraw from community activity, retreating to family and to religion. In the author's view, "A larger sense of community, and a fuller sense of character, is required by the increasing number of people who, in modern capitalism, are doomed to fail (p. 135)."

This "fuller sense of character" is the will to remain engaged in conflict with the forces of the "vigorous new form of capitalism (p. 139)." Conflict is for Mr. Sennett not a destructive, but an integrative force. To integrate business organization into society as a contributor instead of merely submitting to its exploitation, people must engage in conflict with it and with its powerful leaders. This takes strength of character, a will to remain engaged.

But this will can sustain itself only on a sense of being needed that is faint in a capitalistic system that "radiates indifference (p. 146)." The corrosive tendencies reviewed leave the worker feeling useless and unneeded. No longer understanding what happens behind the computer screen, he knows only that he will not be missed after the next corporate reorganization leaves him on the street. Until then he collaborates with relative strangers who have not come to depend on him because they have no "shared narrative of difficulty (p. 147)."

But this "regime which provides human beings no deep reasons to care about one other cannot long preserve its legitimacy (p. 148)," and in this observation Mr. Sennett sees a glimmer of hope for the future, in which he seems to see a new kind of class conflict pitting the alienated worker against the new capitalists who " . . . know that the great majority of those who toil in the flexible regime are left behind (p. 147)."

It is interesting to consider what Mr. Sennett's thought has kept--and what added--over nearly thirty years since his "Uses of Disorder." It is easy to recognize in "Corrosion" the persistence of ideas like "myth of purified community," "constructive failure," and the integrative value of conflict. Just as obvious is an increased emphasis on the social value of trust, which in "Disorder" he minimized: " . . . in a variety of human affairs there are experiences of power and significance that cannot depend on a mutual commitment or trust . . . (pp. 62-63)." Trust comes only with time, and the older man--having more trust and less time--values it more.

I am struck by the visceral and reactive comments in some of the reviews, but this only demonstrates that Sennett has touched a vulnerable nerve among those who have a vested interest in the juggernaut of globalization and commercial frenzy of the Internet. Isn't it interesting that the most volatile reviews come from those in the heart of Silicon Valley? Sennett has succeeeded in illuminating the universal in the particular, yes, through what his critics denigrates as "just anecdotes"? But anecdotes are grounded in human experience, not rarefied abstractions of traditional positivist sociology. His critics ought to go back to read C. Wright Mills' classic The Sociological Imagination, who takes these posivist parasites to task. Sennett also does a stellar job of stripping away the corporate speak and propaganda about "change, teams, reengineering" --the stuff that has made management gurus and their parrot of consultant-followers rich, while the ordinary Joe is the mere anecdotal recipient of such social engineering schemes. Sennett also succeeds in showing how the superficiality of corporate life is bleeding over to the family, eroding away depth and character..this is a sore spot that most managers would rather ignore. As C. Wright Mills, the great sociologist taught, "the political task of the sociologist...is to translate personal troubles into public issues, and public issues into the terms of their human meaning for a variety of indivdiuals" The public isn't moved by barren statistics, it is moved by real stories of real human beings.

I thought this book would be interesting, but I didn't think it would be as relevant to my own career as it turned out to be. Sennett examines the new model of businesses, that of loose networks and short-term assignments, and the effect it has on the psyche of the everyday in-the-trenches worker, everyone from plant workers to middle management. He documents the shift from the corporate family model (the old 1950s "company man" ideal) to the new mercenary, hired hand mentality. The basic theory Sennett proposes is that we need a continuous narrative in our lives. We need to believe that we are progressing, that we accumulate experience and are moving toward successful careers. But with the new economy, there is no narrative. Corporations have a "What have you done for me lately?" mentality. Past successes are less important. Employees work in makeshift teams, per assignment, and individual responsibility becomes nebulous. Our narratives are disjointed, more like a collection of short stories than the novel we want. The only thing I didn't agree with was Sennett's conclusion that the biggest negative effect of this displacement is that it bruises our egos and encourages us to withdraw. I think the greater consequence is our uncertainty, which breeds fear and leads to anger and bitterness.

A book that helps college seniors understand the shifting patterns of employment, but also the shifting meaning of employment in peoples' lives. The book remains very readable, even entertaining, as it presents the historical background on how the meaning of work changed from the 1700s forward, and sociological data on current work and employment patterns. It makes the world of work come alive as a place of opportunity, risk, and disappointment. By its vivid narratives, it helps college students understand that their uncertainty and anxiety are appropriate to the world they are entering, but also encourages them in a spirit of healthy adventure. Super