The New Knowledge

Workers
Dariusz Jemielniak
Kozminski University, Poland
NEW HORIZONS IN MANAGEMENT
Edward Elgar
Cheltenham, UK Northampton, MA, USA
16
3. Knowledge- intensive organizations
THE MEANING OF THE KNOWLEDGE- INTENSIVE
COMPANY
The term knowledge- intensive company is not very precise. Its origins
can be traced to the tradition of economic terminology. There, the division
into capital- intensive and labor- intensive is the time- honored, undisput-
able way of organizational classifcation. In capital- intensive companies,
money plays a more important role than human work, while in labor-
intensive companies it is the other way around. Thus, the statement that
a company can be knowledge- intensive emphasizes the fact that in many
organizations a key resource, and the primary product, is knowledge
(Starbuck, 1992) something distinctive both from capital and from the
people themselves. For example, in the case of Google, people play a very
important role in new product development, yet for the search engine
the important value comes from the developed algorithms and database
attributed to the process of knowledge accumulation.
Of course, we should understand that the terms knowledge and
knowledge- intensive company have an unequivocally positive sound
to them, which unfortunately tends to undermine their popular usage in
management theory. It is dif cult to imagine an organization which com-
municates to its stakeholders that it is not based on knowledge or that its
main product is ignorance or stupidity (Jemielniak and Kociatkiewicz,
2009). The absurdity of such an idea shows that using slogans related
to knowledge and IT terminology can have a purely ideological charac-
ter (Styhre, 2003). Moreover, some companies, even if their operations
have knowledge aspects within them, try to emphasize those aspects
unequivocally by decreasing the weights of others. A good example is
the pharmaceutical industry, which for PR image reasons usually tries
to emphasize their R&D character and to reduce to a minimum the role
of marketing, sales and production, even though these obviously still
do account for similarly important positions in their budgets (Alvesson,
2004). Obviously, high- tech organizations are hybrids of diferent pur-
poses, values and ideas, knowledge creation being just one of many com-
peting (Ciesielska, 2010). Labeling organizations knowledge- intensive
Knowledge- intensive organizations 17
companies is also an attempt to legitimize and validate them, through
redefning organizational identity in the eyes of the stakeholders. Such
managerial rhetoric is a manifestation of a kind of management fashion
and a natural refection of current social interest in the idea of an infor-
mation society, knowledge management, etc. (Klincewicz, 2004; Styhre
and Sundgren, 2005).
However, the changes that have taken place in management and eco-
nomic practices during the last decades are hard to miss. A good example
is IBM, where in 1924 as much as 96 per cent of the companys profts were
generated by machine leasing and 4 per cent by the sale of time cards (to
measure work time). Fifty years later, 80 per cent of IBMs profts were
still generated by equipment leasing, but 15 per cent was now generated by
software sales, and 5 per cent by services. Nearly a further 20 years later,
services (almost entirely related to knowledge work) amounted to 30 per
cent of the companys profts (Cortada, 1998), and in 2009 services gener-
ated 42 per cent, and software 42 per cent.
1
IBM itself, which developed
the frst PCs, has since 2005 totally withdrawn from their production,
including the production of laptop computers, and has sold the relevant
department to the Chinese company Lenovo (for cash and assets).
Looking at the whole global economy, although in 1978 about 80 per
cent of companies value was their tangible assets, and only 20 per cent
intangible ones, just 20 years later that ratio had reversed (Blair and
Wallman, 2001).
However, this whole set of data may be partly misleading. After all,
assets valuation criteria have changed over the years. Intangible and
intellectual property rights assets, though underestimated in accounting,
have long played a very signifcant role in many companies business.
Besides, less weight was previously put on the measurement of what is
now emphasized as knowledge, immaterial assets and the like. Further,
the change to a new economy, which in theory has relied on a decrease
in the importance of production and the increase of the importance of
services, remains in reality to some extent the same old economy, based on
production after all, now, owing to the elimination of legal barriers and
progress in communication, taking place on a global scale. The US, which
is often quoted as the standard example of the new economy, employs
over 14 million people in the production sector, roughly as many as in
1970 (Sweet and Meiksins, 2008). In addition, a dispute over intellectual
capital can be read as a language game, in search of organizational power
(Jrgensen, 2006). It should however, be noted, that even though it is dif -
cult to describe the complete novelty and the economic breakthrough, the
changes observed still point to an important new trend in contemporary
organizations (Dobija and Rosoliska, 2009).
18 The new knowledge workers
This trend is directly related to the increased role of intellectual capital:
knowledge, information and their management systems have at least in
part become more important than the tangible sources of production
(Dobija and Rosolinska, 2010; Stewart, 1997), and their higher values,
as well as having a larger proportional share in a companys stock worth,
are the refection of the increased signifcance of these factors in the eyes
of society. Of cial Airline Guide (OAG) is a good example: the company
publishes fight timetables and is worth more than many of the described
airlines. Similarly, TV Guide, the popular American media magazine
with TV program descriptions and timetables, was in 1989 already worth
US$3billion, much more than many of the TV stations back then (Burrell,
1997).
One of the most quoted management theorists, (Peter Drucker, 1999,
p. 13) states that currently the real assets controlling the means of pro-
duction are neither capital nor land nor labor power, but knowledge.
Consequently, he concludes that instead of capitalists and proletarians the
key social class of the post- capitalist society are highly qualifed workers.
The same opinion was expressed earlier by Alvin Tof er (1970), writing
about the move from the agrarian era through an industrial period to the
IT economy. The main feature of this ongoing change is the transforma-
tion of the value creation method. In the agrarian era the highest value was
characteristically added through the work of muscles and in the industrial
era by machine work, while now in the electronic era it is by intellectual
work, i.e. knowledge and information.
The introduction of the term knowledge- intensive company was
aimed at signaling the profound social changes occurring in the post-
capitalist system paradoxically an unexpected fulfllment of some of the
neo- Marxists visions (Agger, 1989), mainly in the area of the distorted
separation of the owners of the means of production from the workers.
Some call this change a third wave of Industrial Revolution, some call
it post- Fordism, and for some it is an aspect of the information society
revolution. Occasionally the period is described as postmodern capital-
ism. Each name emphasizes a diferent way of perceiving the ongoing
phenomenon or a diferent analytical approach (Zacher, 2001, 1999).
Observers are in agreement however about the possible consequences of
such change (Kumar, 2005). In particular, these include the disappearance
of typical hierarchies, to be replaced by organizational fatness with a
simultaneous change of managerial roles to consulting and often subservi-
ent ones.
Knowledge- intensive companies can of course be divided according to
many diferent criteria. Lowendahl (quoted in Newell et al., 2002, p. 25)
suggests standardization according to Table 3.1.
Knowledge- intensive organizations 19
Mats Alvesson, on the other hand, suggests an easier and clearer divi-
sion into two basic groups of knowledge- intensive companies, according
to whether their focus is on (Alvesson, 2004, p. 18):
professional services (law frms, accounting of ces, consulting agen-
cies, advertising agencies, investment banks etc.), or
research and development (mostly pharmaceutical and biotechno-
logical research centers and high- tech companies based on the work
of hardware engineers and software developers).
The subjects in interest in this book are those organizations that fall into
the second category. This is especially important, as service companies
deal with immaterial goods to a larger extent (mostly through consulting)
as opposed to specifc products, even virtual ones that exist in companies
from the second category. Knowledge workers in the latter companies
have more contact with their clients. It is diferent in the typical high- tech
and software companies, where it is managers, sales representatives and
specially trained employees who assist in such contacts, or are full interme-
diaries with clients. Owing to the very complex social context of such rela-
tions (a greater number of roles, the broader presence of managers etc.)
and because companies that create specifc products still resemble more
traditional production organizations, they seemed to be a more interest-
ing research subject for the topic of this book. Moreover, knowledge-
intensive companies in the service and consulting sector can rely more
on propaganda and on the development of persuasion systems, that is,
Table 3.1 Types of knowledge- intensive frm
Strategic
concentration
Resources Examples
Client- based Relations with
clients
Individually
controlled
Law and
accounting
consulting frms
Solution- based Creative solutions,
innovations
Teamwork Advertising
agencies, software
companies
Output- based Adjustment and
adaptation of
existing solutions
Controlled by the
organization
Certain large
consulting frms
Source: (Newell et al. (2002).
20 The new knowledge workers
on convincing clients about the superiority of their solutions rather than
about their real expertise (Alvesson, 1993). This issue is much less visible
in companies that develop new products and solutions, which hence con-
stitute a clearer example of real knowledge- intensive companies.
Even though this book is based on several years of research on high-
tech frms and on interviews with engineers (mainly programmers) at
Polish and American companies, part of the fndings presented can be
successfully generalized, through analogies, for the greater population
of knowledge workers in the R&D sector. Nevertheless, whenever in this
interpretation the subject of knowledge workers is mentioned, it should be
taken into account that the practical part of the project has relied mainly
on software engineers.
THE IT REVOLUTION
One of the frst writers about the efects of the IT revolution was Daniel
Bell (1973). He predicted the dawn of the post- industrial era, in which
services, and not production, would play a key role, while the highest
value added would be generated by the new- technology industry. The
social stratifcation would be reshuf ed, and new elites would be formed,
relying mostly on technological knowledge. Similarly, a belief in dispens-
ing with the traditional hierarchies was expressed by Serge Mallet (1975),
who predicted the sudden arrival in the mid 1980s of a new working
class, which would set aside procedures and frm hierarchies and replace
them with power based on qualifcations and knowledge.
In turn, for some more skeptical futurologists, the progressive indus-
trialization process was not really a way of freeing employees from their
traditional hierarchies, but rather became a necessary next step toward
increasing a new type of grip over them (Zubof, 1988). This step would
be accomplished through the enhanced possibilities of precise surveil-
lance and through advances in IT. It would lead to the confnes of the
iron cage, that is, increased supervision over procedures and deepening
rational bureaucratic control (Ritzer, 1993; M. Weber, 2001). For such
authors, the shift in value chain from production quality to marketing and
branding would result in even more social oppression and a further deep-
ening of worker objectifcation (Klein, 2000).
Usually, neither, the skeptics nor the optimists question the increasing
role of specialist knowledge. At most, daring predictions to a great extent
eliminate traditional hierarchies and managerial roles and also reduce
many traditional institutions. According to one such analysis (Gephart,
2002, p. 334), the advances in the new technologies:
Knowledge- intensive organizations 21
Transform the nature, form, and temporal aspects of work; infuence the struc-
ture and meaning of the workplace; and impact human relations in organiza-
tional settings ... They also lead to changes in ... power and authority [and]
communication and participation.
It should be noted that this idea is not a new one. Already Plato in his
dialogue The Republic had advocated governments made up of experts. As
Schn notices, a dream that organizations would reach a phase in which
they would be completely meritocratic, and that knowledge would be
as important for industry as steel used to be, is one of the big myths that
have been accompanying our civilization for centuries (Schn, 1983). It is
an attempt to create a grand narrative (Lyotard, 1987),
2
or a powerful
myth about technological progress and the enlightened governance of the
most competent.
The complete fulfllment of such a vision would require a transforma-
tion of the essence of the powerknowledge relation, as described by
Foucault. According to the French philosopher, knowledge is an ability to
communicate sentences that in a given environment are accepted as true
(Foucault, 2000). This truth relies on discourse, and is a proposal for the
listener yet it is also fundamentally linked to power. Social power barri-
ers also set knowledge barriers. For instance, one cannot be a criminolo-
gist when there are no prisons and no law enforcement systems in place
(Allen, 1999). Similarly, psychiatric diagnosis is justifed because in
the discourse it is simultaneously linked to power (the actual authority to
label the patient as mentally ill and to restrain them). Powerknowledge
relations are, therefore, united, strengthening each other, yet without a
possibility, in social reality, of being independent of each other.
Moreover, together with increased power asymmetry (and vertical
control, replacing control through equal peers), the experts role grows in
signifcance, as they are considered to be better suited for proposing justi-
fed solutions (Bauman, 1998). Not only are the hierarchical elements not
eliminated from structures, or organizational relations democratized, by
the spread of the knowledge society, but in fact the perversely attractive
opposite hypothesis can be made: such change actually increases hierar-
chies and builds more layers of structures and nuances of power. This
happens because the higher the esteem the experts have, the more access
to knowledge is considered a privilege and must be formalized. Also, the
specialists themselves are stratifed at diferent levels of both competence
and assigned authority (Leicht and Fennell, 2001). At best, the main shift
in the revolutionary change described would be in moving from a general
knowledge to a localized, genealogical one (Jrgensen, 2002).
In the context of contemporary change, it does not make any sense to
talk about the replacement of traditional power division by an egalitarian
22 The new knowledge workers
system based more on competence such a claim would be far too idealis-
tic. However, signifcant changes can be observed, which (though they do
not lead to the fattening of organizational structures, or to meritocratic
organizations), do result in the shake- up of the current status quo. The
classic and clear division of functions between capital and labor may be
distorted in practice many specialists (and managers) have to combine
both functions (Carter, 1985).
Organizational knowledge is also being redefned. Again, it is not so
much a matter of its increased or decreased value, or of its share in product
development, but rather of some kind of shuf ing of the social groups that
are validated to pass on judgments seen as legitimate by the others. In that
sense, this shuf ing leads to changes in organizational power, and yet it
does not have to be directly linked to the power that is based on the right
to give orders. It is, rather, related to the power that is the authority to
make assessments and is understood not only as something we have, but
also as something given to us by others (Latour, 1986), and as carrying
with it the right to abstain from some submission rituals.
One of the main signs of these transformations is the creation of new
professions (in other words, the common acceptance of the rights of these
new professions to make authoritative judgments; address the topic of
professions in Chapter 4). That new elite is mostly made up of knowl-
edge workers (Brante, 1988, p. 123):
In contrast to the old bureaucracy, their positions do not rest on legal author-
ity, but on argument, reason, and knowledge. Therefore, they stand in a
politically contradictory relation to the old guardians, which they regard as
irrational and ignorant.
This revolution results in an obvious and inevitable organizational
confict. The rise of the IT society and the role of knowledge- intensive
companies leads, in a very natural way, as indicated above, to a signifcant
social change.
At the same time, in organizational and management theory, there are
a surprisingly small number of scientifc publications that analyze this
important phenomenon from the point of view of high- tech companies.
Although there are many publications giving advice to managers on how
to deal with subordinates in high- tech industry (Williams, 2002), as well as
general DIY books on how to manage knowledge workers (Amar, 2002;
Horibe, 1999), or, more broadly, on organizational and hierarchical trans-
formation in the modern world, there are few studies that have focused
on employee perceptions. That is the aim of critical management theory
(Alvesson and Willmott, 2003; Knights and Willmott, 1999; Magala,
2009; Rehn, 2008), which so far has dealt relatively rarely with high- tech
Knowledge- intensive organizations 23
employees (more often, as in the Anglo- Saxon tradition, it focuses on
manual workers).
Yet the study of employee perceptions and a partial understanding of
their group logic are of huge importance for a better description of the
ongoing phenomenon. They are, in fact, more interesting than those of the
managers, since the employees actually do the work. Moreover, in the case
of organizational animosities, where one of the active sides is taken by the
managers, their perception of organizational dynamics is of even less value
than usual because their bias and subjectivity are increased.
Taking into account the obvious contradiction of organizational roles
between knowledge workers and managers, it can be expected that
the result of such a study will shed new light on the ongoing changes.
The research method particularly useful in such types of studies is an
interpretive organizational anthropology, because it allows for the use of
the thick description (Geertz, 1973) that is, the opportunity to attain
the perception of the organizational actors themselves, understood in the
context of their activities and logic. This and other methodological issues
are described in more detail in Chapter 5.
NOTES
1. According to the companys Annual Report 2009, available at: http://www.ibm.com/
investor/fnancials/fnancial- reporting.wss (accessed 14 June 2010).
2. According to Lyotard, the term grand narrative or metanarrative is a kind of an
interpretation key, which existed in most centuries, and in modernism especially, as a
universal explanation of ongoing processes. One example of the grand narrative can be
the Enlightenments conviction that the development of rationalism and science would
lead to moral/ethical progress; or similarly the Marxist assumption that social liberation
is conditional on revolution. According to Lyotard, the postmodernist (or rather late
modernist) era is characterized by the skepticism and rejection of grand narratives, which
have been replaced by a series of small, so far unsuccessful, pretenses to take over the
role of the grand narrative.
24
4. Knowledge workers
This book is based on the study of programmers. In the literature they
fall into the category of knowledge workers, professionals, engineers and
white- collars. All these categories are justifed, although each one takes
account of slightly diferent dimensions of their role, which is why these
terms and categories are the subject of this chapter.
In terms of broad simplifcation, it can be assumed that, for knowledge
workers, knowledge is as much the resource and means of production as
it is the result of their work (Newell et al., 2002). For them, to divide work
up into planning, scheduling and following the plan is a gross distortion.
This is a view which, as mentioned earlier, has appeared only recently and
is typical of the transformation process taking place in the knowledge-
intensive economy.
Because this category of employees is relatively new and small, most
modern analysis of contemporary organizational transformation proc-
esses relates to manual workers and is linked to the quite obvious observa-
tion that the mechanization and computerization of production change
the character of manual work for more than they do that of intellectual
work. Experts who deal with the latest technologies in particular are
seldom the subject of these academic considerations. This is mostly due
to the novelty of their profession, (which makes them seem less prone to
changes). Second, a common belief is that through their link to technology
and access to knowledge they enjoy a privileged status, and may indeed
even seem to exist above and beyond typical organizational power play.
Despite appearances, however, the case is not so clear. The organizational
workplace in high- tech companies is subject to interesting changes which
in addition can refect on the manageremployee relation in more tradi-
tional frms.
High- tech company employees (and programmers in particular)
form a specifc knowledge worker subgroup that is in the process of
negotiating their organizational status and the creation of their profes-
sional roles which is also what makes them a very interesting research
topic.
Knowledge workers 25
PROFESSIONAL ROLES
As was rightly noticed by John Van Maanen, (1977, p. 8), to the same
extent that people make careers, careers make people. Gandhi spoke in the
same spirit, saying that we become who we think we are.
The notion of the professional role has diferent meanings in various
academic disciplines. In organization and management theory, as well as
in sociology (but rather diferently from what we fnd in for example psy-
chology, where we come across the cognitive theory of roles), social roles
are used mainly in two approaches:
Functional, and
symbolic- interactive.
In the functional concept, already used in the 1930s by Ralph Linton,
but coherently presented later in the work of Talcott Parsons (Parsons and
Shils, 1951), social roles refer to scripts of individual repetitive behaviors.
An individual has a designated position within a stable social system and
receives sets of expectations and standards that are related to his or her
occupational, organizational, family etc. role. This approach was popular
in science up until the end of the 1970s. Today, however, it is decreasing
in signifcance. In turn, the symbolic- interactive approach, commenced by
George Mead (1934), apart from sets of social expectations and standards
imposed on actors, puts emphasis on the dynamic creation of the roles,
with the participation of their performers. Thanks to this perspective, it is
easier to analyze the informal aspects of role creation (which are at least
as important as idealistic social behavioral patterns, and sometimes even
more so). The change of approach to the issue of social roles is a subject
of further analysis in the context of its infuence on the process of profes-
sionalization (see under Professionals, pp. 00f.); here it should only be
emphasized that this book takes the symbolic- interactive approach and
further links professional and organizational roles with ad hoc created
behavioral scenarios that result mostly from the socialization processes of
a specifed group and the informal interactions within that group. Hence,
the subjects of special interest in this approach are all the beliefs, opinions,
behaviors and rituals of the members of a given group.
Of course, social roles, when so understood, are also created to a great
extent as a reaction to the roles suggested by other actors. In this sense,
girls who have been ofered (by their teachers, parents etc.) the roles of
well- behaved, polite young ladies who dislike mathematics soon start to
actually take such roles seriously and comply (Rothenbuhler, 2003, p. 90).
Thus, roles are under the infuence of (Kostera, 1996):
26 The new knowledge workers
societal expectations (set for members of given groups, for example
priests are expected not to overuse alcohol in public, and IT special-
ists are allowed to walk around in torn trousers);
professional group expectations (played out among professionals, as
well as by each of them alone, i.e. assumptions made by them about
ourselves);
organizational expectations (assumptions about the character of a
given role expressed by the organizational representatives).
These are summarized in Figure 4.1.
The acceptance of social roles (including professional ones) goes on
throughout ones lifetime; however an education plays an important
role it is a tool for communicating social expectations about a given
profession. That specifc form of modern ritual (Collins, 1990, p. 26)
relies not only on the real remittance of specialist knowledge but also (and
maybe mostly) on the strengthening of the professional role. A few years
of education and thinking of oneself as of a future performer in a given
profession can sometimes be more important than the knowledge gained
from study itself. This phenomenon is also related to the absorption of
perceptual standards: the rules for seeing the environment. For program-
mers, it is important, for example, to form an appropriate opinion on
ordinary users of computers, who are often treated with disrespect and are
looked down on as those without access to the knowledge available to the
clued- up ones (Jemielniak, 2008c).
Professional roles naturally involve an assumption both that playing
them requires special skills and preparation, and also that the actor
playing them does so almost without efort (Gofman, 2000, p. 75). In
this sense, formal education has the most signifcant symbolic value it
supports professional monopoly, but also gives the impression that the
graduate is someone who, following graduation, has been created again
and singled out from the others, after the most liminal (i.e. transitional)
experience of social transformation (Turner, 1977).
Within all three dimensions (institutional, organizational, and profes-
sional), the apparent small displays of control are also very important.
Institutional dimension
Social dimension Professional group dimension
Figure 4.1 Factors formulating professional roles
Knowledge workers 27
Though expressed in a very subtle way, through language, artifacts and
rituals, they can have a huge impact. Even such neutral issues as the way of
formulating kitchen equipment instructions can, according to Elizabeth B.
Silva (2000), serve to maintain gender and power- relation roles. Minor as it
might seem, the change in the way those addicted to alcohol are described,
from being a drunk to becoming an alcoholic, resulted in a major
shift in the ways alcoholism was perceived. As Richard H. Brown (1998)
shows, this linguistic nuance possibly led to development of help centers for
addicts in hospitals and medical clinics, and to the disappearance of centers
managed by the churches. These observations lead to an important conclu-
sion: even seemingly mundane and insignifcant behaviors and customs, as
well as the vocabulary used for describing social reality, are worth analyz-
ing, as they may be symptomatic of bigger issues and cultural changes.
The professional and institutional dimension of a group is mostly defned
through socialization at the workplace. Because of that, workers know
who to respect, who to ignore, what is right and what is wrong (Konecki,
1992). They learn who they should be like, just as much as they unlearn the
undesired identities, and the processs organizational oblivion and empty
spaces i.e. areas and topics avoided in everyday organizational life (Ciuk
and Kostera, 2010; Kociatkiewicz and Kostera, 1999) are just as important
for understanding workplace reality as organizational learning is.
A solid analysis of the processes of maintaining social roles can be
achieved for example through a situational study (non- participant obser-
vation) or a narrative study (an analysis of statements and interactions,
as well as organizational myths and stories). A study of the narratives
constructed only by representatives of a single professional group has the
advantage of directly approaching that groups convictions (Jemielniak
and Kostera, 2010). Although in statement analysis it is dif cult to
approach information on how it really is in the organization (a great
challenge also for other research methods), it is easier to study the basic
development process of professional roles: they are created through what
the performing actors say and think (Boje, 1991; Feldman and Sklberg,
2004), and also through their myths and archetypes (Kostera, 2007,
2008b). That is why it is also interesting to study the prejudices and the
stereotypes if they are typical for the majority of that professions repre-
sentatives (Gill, 2003).
Professional roles are an important part of employee identity. This is one
reason why, according to some authors, the study of professional groups
is even more important than the study of organizations themselves (Van
Maanen and Barley, 1984). For many people, position and its prestige
are of signifcant importance, which is why they are willing to make huge
sacrifces to look their best in it, sometimes despite any obvious economic
28 The new knowledge workers
interest. As Gofman observes (1961, p. 63), a professional can behave in a
very modest way in the street, yet put in a lot of efort to show of their com-
petences in the social circle in which their professional activity takes place.
What is interesting is that the feeling of professional pride in practice
applies to all occupations without exception, regardless of societys per-
ception of the given activity. There is a strong need to feel that we are
doing something important and useful and for each profession to ofer
some kind of pride to its members. Even strippers emphasize that they
play an important therapeutic role, prostitutes and pimps believe that
because of them there are fewer rapes and divorces, and for thieves their
activity partially serves as a readjustment of unjust social diferences
(Bryan, 1966; Trice, 1993).
The variety of roles performed by workers and professionals is almost
infnite. The subject of this book is knowledge workers; hence it is impor-
tant to diferentiate and specify who falls into that category and how that
category fts the existing typologies.
WHITE- COLLAR WORKERS
In the sociology of work and professions, a classic division is into manual
(blue- collar) workers and of ce (white- collar) workers. Despite
appearances, this division is relatively conventional and is not associated
only with purely physical (or not) aspects of work. Smith et al. (1996), as
an example, note that secretaries are counted as white- collar workers while
technicians who install phones are regarded as manual workers. They
notice that this division relies more on the span of control, the location of
the employee and the social prestige of the occupation than on the number
of manual activities necessary for the work.
In reality, it is dif cult to explain logically why a creative, brilliant
plumber is still regarded as a manual worker, and an old- fogy dentist
who mechanically and routinely does the simplest procedures, undisput-
edly falls into the intellectual worker category (Jemielniak, 2005). Only
by drawing attention to social status (professionalism, formal education
and prestige) does it become clear that the division of work aims mostly
to diferentiate those workers who, under some circumstances, have a
right to express their opinions, from other workers who mainly have to
follow orders. A ferce competition over whose work is to be recognized
as non- manual goes on all the time between various professional groups
(Meiksins, 1985). According to Harry Braverman (1974), work organiza-
tion on a production line is greatly determined not by its functionality but
in a symbolic way a worker who has to work for his or her master in
Knowledge workers 29
doing so becomes similar to the machines, and the technology is only one
of the ways of emphasizing that asymmetrical social relation.
It should be noted also that the IT revolution and the development of
the smart machines, as Shoshana Zubof (1988) calls them, results also
(as mentioned earlier) in an increased scope of employee control. Although
at the beginning of the twentieth century mechanical supervision over
employees was limited to time cards stamped on entering and leaving the
production site (the rest being imposed by the pace of the work and human
supervisors), the contemporary scope and detailed control, thanks to IT
developments, is almost infnite. Manual workers work under the supervi-
sion of cameras, so their efectiveness is constantly monitored. Moreover,
unlike when there is a human supervisor present, in case of CCTV it is
much more dif cult to tell if they are being watched or not (more precisely,
whether whoever sits at the other end of the cable is looking at the monitor
at that very moment or whether the camera is recording or not).
The common accessibility and low prices of the control systems result
in the degradation of occupations traditionally considered as white- collar,
for example staf at a post of ce or a bank counter. Clerical professions are
rapidly declassifed i.e. downgraded and deskilled and in the same time
there are fewer jobs for factory workers.
In that sense, we can really discuss manual work only conventionally,
even if it requires more real knowledge and skill than many intellectual
activities. The main distinctive feature of blue- collar work is the expecta-
tion of total submission to the manager, in a spirit not far removed from
Taylorism (Taylor, 1911/1998). Indeed, manual work is the one category
in which an employers frst expectation of an employee is their undisputed
obedience to orders.
Based on that division, the programmers studied quite obviously fell
into the white- collar category. The distinction, however, does not take
any analysis much further; hence, it has to be supplemented with a more
modern typology of professions.
PROFESSIONALS
A profession is a specifc kind of intellectual occupations The noun pro-
fessio in Midieral Latin meant the taking of church vows. Later, besides
priests, into the category of professionals fell doctors and lawyers, so that
the professions came to signify these three occupations until modern
times (Collins English Dictionary, 2007). Professionalization theory can
be a useful analytical tool to examine the processes that are taking place
among intellectual workers.
30 The new knowledge workers
Probably the clearest defnition of professionalism is given by one of the
well- known researchers on that issue, Eliot Freidson, who writes (2001,
p. 12) that the term refers to the institutional conditions under which rep-
resentatives of the given profession, and not the consumers or the manag-
ers, control the work its access, processes and results.
Traditionally, professions were seen quite idealistically. The process
of professionalization was perceived as addressing some social need to
meet the requirements for high- quality services and their standardization
hence it was believed that professions evolve in peace, to some extent,
out of the goodness of the heart (this approach is directly related to the
functionalists understanding of the social roles mentioned earlier).
The consecutive phases and necessary distinctive features of a profes-
sion were distinguished, and the given job had to meet those criteria to
be considered a profession. The common requirements for professions
included the following criteria (Carr- Saunders and Wilson, 1933; Goode,
1957; Wilensky, 1964):
1. A body of professional knowledge based on scientifc theory.
2. A course of education (usually higher), lasting a few years and prepar-
ing one to work and exhibit real competences and knowledge of the
culture and customs of ones profession.
3. The clients welfare and social service forming an important source of
work motivation.
4. The work performed addressing signifcant social needs (health care,
lifesaving, solving serious conficts, etc.).
5. The work possessing an autonomous character, with its assessment
mostly in the hands of other members of the same profession.
6. Membership in the profession being long- term, with a strong percep-
tion of professional community and solidarity.
7. A highly developed code of ethics and internal rules of conduct.
The subsequent sociological literature has withdrawn from the peace-
ful view of a profession. It was quickly noticed that the professionaliza-
tion process relies mostly on groups who battle over power, prestige and
autonomy, rather than relying simply on altruism (Marks and Thompson,
2010). As was indicated in the previous subsection, the scientifc knowl-
edge of a given profession is of course socially constructed, inextricably
intertwined with power and is the subject of constant inter- subjective
negotiations, which infuence the perception of the status of that given
profession (Blackler, 1993).
It has been also noticed that professionalization theory is useful in
the analysis of many jobs, but some of them do not necessary meet all
Knowledge workers 31
the theoretical conditions. Additionally, the order of accomplishing the
phases in the theoretical professionalization model has proven to be very
dubious. That is why Andrew D. Abbott, in his highly acclaimed work The
System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor, suggested
that it is more sensible to withdraw altogether from attempts to defne
the necessary phases or diferentiators of professionalization. Instead, he
suggested focusing on the social processes through which occupations lay
claim to specifc knowledge and operational areas as their own (Abbott,
1988).
The basic contemporary diferentiator of a profession is, therefore,
the specifc ability to seize a defned jurisdiction, an area in which the
representatives of that given profession are considered to be competent.
Occupations compete against each other for legitimization. That rivalry
may, as a side efect, be benefcial for society, as it is one of the reasons why
a profession requires continuous supplemental training for its members,
regardless of basic university education (Ben- David, 1971). Claims to rec-
ognition of the exclusive rights to particular turfs are particularly efective
if society believes that those professional activities not only require knowl-
edge and skills but also will signifcantly increase both peoples security of
and their wealth, especially in situations where the potential losses are great.
A natural and indispensable element of the system of professions is the
dispute among various occupations over assigning problems to areas of
specialization (Abbott, 1988). Thus, it becomes very important to have
the ability to defne social problems in the language appropriate for the
given profession. For example, depending on the manner of describing a
situation, a childs conduct can be described as hyperactive (a medical
problem: psychiatric consultation is required and possibly a pharmaceuti-
cal treatment); rude (the problem lies within the upbringing psychology,
its solution requiring consultation with a family counselor or psychologist
and maybe one or more therapeutic sessions); sinful (also a behavioral
problem, but requiring a consultation with an priest and maybe prayer);
unappeased (a problem with organizing activities, suggesting the need
for consultation with a sports coach or youth tutor); and so on.
Professions fercely compete with each other over the areas in which they
are competent. A very good example from some countries is the debate,
from the early twentieth century, between accountants and fnanciers,
which has resulted in the seizure by the frst group of the rights to defne
and assess accounting standards in organizations. Similar is the current
process of psychoanalysts gaining independence and taking the position
previously assigned to psychiatry and psychology (Leveille, 2002), or the
constant confict between lawyers and tax advisers on the scope of their
respective authorities (Felstiner, 2005).
32 The new knowledge workers
Hence, a profession is diferent from a common occupation in its ability
to gain independence and to reserve to itself the area in which its represent-
atives are considered to have full social legitimacy to make judgments and
to supervise the process and the results of work (Cullen, 1978). Members
of occupations that are successfully professionalized are therefore, granted
in part, the power to take independent actions, regardless of the employing
organization.
Joseph A. Raelin believes (1986) that in many organizations, and in
knowledge- intensive ones in particular, there is a confict between man-
agers and professionals. According to him, the confict is due not only to
contradicting interests (and competition over prestige, authority, resources
etc.) but also to a fundamental culture clash. On one side is the corporate
culture and on the other a strong occupational culture represented by the
professionals, who identify themselves mostly with their job and not the
corporation. This division has already been observed by Alvin W. Gouldner
(1957), who made a distinction between cosmopolitans, or employees
whose loyalty depends mostly on their professional role and locals,
those employees whose loyalty is to their organization. Similar tensions are
observed in software corporations, too (DMello and Eriksen, 2010).
In fact, contemporary professionals typically defne their roles in relation
to their clients and not to their organizations or their managers (Larson,
1993). It is one of the consequences of modernity, as Anthony Giddens
(1990) puts it, that expert knowledge is more and more widespread, and
there are fewer and fewer sentences which can be sensibly uttered without
a specialist background. Expert status allows its holders to bypass the
organizational hierarchies a manager is thus seen as someone without
the appropriate training to make decisions. Professionals, who mostly
have relations with clients, often perceive their supervisors as incompetent
and even as interfering in their work (Jemielniak, 2007b). Many profes-
sionals often earn more than their managers this is particularly the case
for example at corporations that trade in fnancial instruments (Lewis,
1989). In some cases, when their authority is considerable and the profes-
sional status is stable, professionals take over actual control of an organi-
zation, by forming a professional bureaucracy (Mintzberg, 1993).
The professionals specialist authority is so great that they can ques-
tion managerial roles. Professionals often believe that (Trice, 1993, p. 41)
members of their given professions and not the managers should control
the most important aspects of the work. This view is in clear contrast
with the managerial assumptions namely, that the managers should
control the majority of the prerogatives.
This confict, according to neo- Marxist analysis, results in part from
the proximity of professional and managerial roles. Some analyses suggest
Knowledge workers 33
that the managers themselves form a specifc profession (Komiski,
1999; Leicht and Fennell, 2001), which on the one hand tries to keep its
autonomy from the owners and does not allow investors to be in control
and make decisions, and on the other tries to subordinate all other profes-
sions to it, as these others are an obvious threat. At the same time, profes-
sionals may take over the managerial roles to a great extent. A managerial
model of reimbursement founded on, apart from basic salary, share option
ofers at a company, in the IT industry relates to knowledge workers in
particular. For Poulantzas (quoted in Burris, 1999), professionals and,
more broadly, intellectual workers, because of their professional roles,
strengthen the ideological dominance of the managers (by separating
common employees from the production processes, and through usurping
and monopolizing their areas of competence).
Professionals, as Freidson (2001, p. 151) states, are subjected to the ruling
class, but they also often have supervisory functions. Their interactions with
subordinates, their social status, their institutional authority and their for-
mally justifed expert knowledge all emphasize respect and power distance.
Seeing professionalism only in terms of class struggle, however, does not
do justice to the topic. Table 4.1 refects these classifcation problems, by
showing the diferent typologies of the popular theorists.
When describing the future of the intellectual professions and the devel-
opment of a new social class, while at the same time criticizing the basis
of the Marxist analysis, Gouldner (1979) had already in the 1970s pointed
to the inadequacy of the classic typologies for categorizing knowledge
workers and technical laborers.
According to Ronald M. Pavalko (1971) the increased signifcance of
a given profession results naturally in the development of its professional
loyalty (as opposed to an organizational loyalty). Professionals, regard-
less of their individual economic position, feel more related to their peers
than to their employers. They are collectively placed somehow between
traditionally defned classes, or, to use the terminology of Eric O. Wright
(1985), they have contradictory class locations, that combine aspects
typical of several groups.
It is dif cult to negate the importance of reaction speed, of liquidity
and of the value of information in the modern world (Castells, 1996),
even if they seriously deprive many people of actual choices and limit
their freedom (Bauman, 2007). The standard explanation given as to why
the structures of many companies are becoming fatter and fatter (a fact
certain at least in the management literature discourse, which in itself is
to make the meme of fattering structures interesting enough) is that it
is in response to the need for faster reactions. It is worth noting however
that the structural changes can also be the result of the increased role of
34
T
a
b
l
e

4
.
1

S
o
c
i
a
l

c
l
a
s
s
e
s

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

t
h
e

d
i
f

e
r
e
n
t

t
h
e
o
r
i
e
s
D
e
t
a
i
l
e
d

s
o
c
i
a
l

c
l
a
s
s

g
r
o
u
p
S
o
c
i
a
l

c
l
a
s
s

b
y

P
o
u
l
a
n
t
z
a
s
S
o
c
i
a
l

c
l
a
s
s

b
y

M
i
l
l
s
S
o
c
i
a
l

c
l
a
s
s

b
y

E
h
r
e
n
r
e
i
c
h
S
o
c
i
a
l

c
l
a
s
s

b
y

C
a
r
c
h
e
d
i
S
o
c
i
a
l

c
l
a
s
s

b
y

W
r
i
g
h
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
s

a
n
d


s
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
o
r
s
N
e
w

s
m
a
l
l

b
o
u
r
g
e
o
i
s
N
e
w

m
i
d
d
l
e

c
l
a
s
s
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
-

m
a
n
a
g
e
r
i
a
l

c
l
a
s
s
N
e
w

m
i
d
d
l
e

c
l
a
s
s
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
s

a
n
d

s
u
p
e
r
v
i
s
o
r
s
T
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

w
o
r
k
e
r
s


a
n
d

p
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
s
P
r
o
l
e
t
a
r
i
a
t
Q
u
a
s
i
-
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
l

w
o
r
k
e
r
s

(
b
y

q
u
a
l
i
f

c
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
M
e
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
l


i
n
t
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
l

w
o
r
k
e
r
s
P
r
o
l
e
t
a
r
i
a
t
N
o
n
-
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
v
e


m
a
n
u
a
l

w
o
r
k
e
r
s
P
r
o
l
e
t
a
r
i
a
t
P
r
o
l
e
t
a
r
i
a
t
P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
v
e

m
a
n
u
a
l


w
o
r
k
e
r
s
P
r
o
l
e
t
a
r
i
a
t
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

L
i
u

(
2
0
0
4
,

p
.

3
3
)
.
Knowledge workers 35
professionals in organizations. Although many researchers point out that
the modern organization values expert knowledge highly, the majority still
consider that process to be a consequence of global organizational change,
rather than a reason for the change itself. Of course, the cause and efect
can be dif cult to diferentiate here. It should be remembered, however,
that in the confict between managers and professionals, managers often
resort to outsourcing expert activities, so as to make for the almost com-
plete elimination of competition for power, prestige and authority within
the organization. Thus, structures may be becoming fatter and fatter
because also of the rivalry of the management with the professionals. This
rationale helps us understand why organizations decide to employ free-
lancers even in situations when it is more costly to do so than to hire full-
time employees, and when they need qualifed personnel on a long- term
basis (S.R. Barley and Kunda, 2004).
Another interesting observation was that by Valerie Fourier (1999),
who claims that the usage of professional ethos and the provision of the
name tag professional to defne a job can be, quite perversely, a mana-
gerial control tool. People who believe that they are members of a profes-
sion try to work better and in a more reliable way, thus imposing higher
standards. In this sense, the ideology of professionalism is a variation of
normative control (Kunda, 1992). The same spirit can be found in the
work of Philip Kraft (1977), who indicates that the process of imposing
professional identity on programmers is an organizational way to increase
their ef ciency and also to reduce their salaries, because exchanging
information about pay is considered unprofessional. Employees in the
Kraft study did not compare their incomes, which allowed the company to
keep their salaries at a lower level.
Similar and other managerial strategies to execute control over intel-
lectual workers, and professionals in particular, have been the subject
of academic discourse in recent years (Winstanley, 1996). Of particular
interest is the study of the professionalization process at the cutting edge
of social changes, as described earlier, and its relation to the development
of the IT society. Engineers and programmers are a good example of the
new technical professions.
ENGINEERS
The appearance of computer technology and its related professions has
shaken up the current professional system. IT processes can be found in
all industries, and IT experts have quickly been awarded high status and a
new, previously unoccupied scope of competence (Abbott, 1988).
36 The new knowledge workers
Contemporarily, software runs almost all electronic equipment from
alarm clocks and TV sets to banking and life support systems. Unnoticed,
algorithms and programming codes have led to the reduction of the areas
subject to social negotiation, for example through the introduction of a
limited number of choice options in automated hotlines or through copy-
right rules, embedded in standard user agreements made for program or
music CDs, that are uniform with only one specifc legal system, namely
that of the US (Lessig, 1999). The infuence of software and thus of the
knowledge workers who develop it in every area of social life cannot be
overestimated. At the same time, direct management control over pro-
gramming is impossible. Even though software engineering shares many
similarities with both engineering and production work, in some aspects
it is diametrically diferent (because of, for example, the fuzzy division
between the respective roles of designer and performer, as well as the less
obvious ownership of the means of production).
Technical workers, or engineers at least, have traditionally been con-
sidered as cooperating with managers (C. Smith, 1996). For many neo-
Marxists they have constituted an intermediary group between the manual
workers and the supervisors (C. Smith, 1987) or a specifc subgroup within
the ones in charge. David Noble even makes a point that (1979, p. 30) the
elimination of human errors and uncertainty, as for example in a modern
zero defects system, is a way of expressing the need of the owners of
capital to reduce their dependence on workers. Since this process is per-
formed by and through engineers, it exemplifes the contrasting interests
within the capitalist production system. It should be remembered that
management has been for quite some time considered as a kind of variation
of engineering applied to humans (Noble, 1977; Shenhav, 1999), and there
are still many technocrats among managers who are fascinated by indica-
tors, algorithms and quantitative management models (Komiski, 1977).
Of course, also from the class struggle perspective, engineers are a privi-
leged group, greatly interested in maintaining both the status quo and the
system in which manual workers jobs are constantly defned as generat-
ing the lowest value added (Burawoy, 1979). According to some authors
they even sometimes identify more with the organization than with their
occupation (Kunda and Van Maanen, 1999, p. 64): [M]anagers and pro-
fessionals (particularly engineers) are those who most closely identify with
the companies for whom they work.
Without a doubt, both groups are on the better side of the digital divi-
sion, which additionally enhances their position. Alvin and Heidi Tof er
have called the increase in the dominance of knowledge- intensive work
over manual work a replacement of the proletariat by a cognitariat
(Tof er and Tof er, 1995, p. 55). From this point of view, social position
Knowledge workers 37
is determined not by the relationship to the means of production, but by
the nature of information technologies. The proletariat (or informa-
tion lumpenproletariat) includes people who use IT in a passive way,
by watching TV or playing computer games. The cognitariat consists
of those individuals who use IT resources in an active and conscious
way, though they have no infuence on their content. The digitariat,
however, is a category of people who not only use technology fuently, but
also develop the knowledge transmitted by it and construct the informa-
tion systems. Among digitarians there is an obvious division into power
elites, those who create information and develop its remittance by others,
and a special subgroup of technical workers that remain subject to their
dominion but create tools that allow the distribution of information. The
latter are the digital supervisors, helping the privileged caste. Engineers
are the wealthy representatives of the ruling class, potentially capable of
subversion and seizure of power, by keeping control over the development
of algorithms and information management systems (Krzysztofek, 2007).
This line of thinking is in part similar to the neo- Weberian tradition, in
which technical workers usually have administrative functions, and, in
part, executive ones (Zussman, 1985).
On the face of it, engineers, in the IT industry in particular, constitute
a very specifc group of their own, escaping easy classifcation. In some
instances, in an obvious way, engineers fall into the white- collar category
(for example architects, software designers etc.). In some instances, however,
despite a higher education, they have jobs similar to those in the blue- collar
category and are subjected to the same kind of supervision (for example tech-
nicians who arrange equipment, some operators of technical hotlines etc.).
As an interesting study by Abigail Marks and Chris Baldry (2009) shows,
many IT employees feel themselves to be working class, even though they
perceive their occupation as belonging to the middle class.
Stephen Barley noticed (S.R. Barley, 1992) that technical workers and
engineers while mostly craftsmen, could be classifed within almost any
professional group (excluding managers), according to their diversifed
capabilities of transferring knowledge into their diferent organizational
contexts, and also based on their diversifed authority regarding manage-
ment and supervision (Table 4.2).
According to other authors, many professionals activities directly seen
as involved in software development closely resemble craftwork or even
low- level managerial work and under no conditions can be classifed as
knowledge- intensive employment, or the work of professionals (Marks
and Scholarios, 2007). As Peter Cappelli (2001, p. 94) believes, Aside
from pay, many IT jobs but especially computer programming jobs
would qualify as lousy work.
38 The new knowledge workers
To outsiders, diferences within the engineering environment can seem
insignifcant, but for insiders they are obvious and very important. These
diferences are particularly visible in the IT industry. Additionally, both
among white- collars and blue- collars, true specialists (independently creat-
ing value for a company based on their knowledge, or using that knowledge
creatively to solve problems) can be distinguished from average but solid
old stagers (performing very repetitive and reproductive tasks). Examples
of the IT professions within those two divisions, based on research and
interviews, can be found in Table 4.3. Paradoxically, the old stagers are
characterized by a higher level of job security (the need for their services is
very stable in any organization), while specialists often work on the project
base this tendency is visible in the IT industry in general (S.R. Barley and
Kunda, 2004).
Even though it is dif cult to argue that many engineers dont identify
with their work (this is typical of many of the modern professions, but
also, as mentioned earlier, of managers), the post- industrial transforma-
tion processes described earlier distinctively infuence the polarization
Table 4.3 Types of IT profession
White- collar Blue- collar
Specialist System designer, analyst,
programmer
Technical support
Old- stager Programmer, coder Software/hardware
implementation
Table 4.2 Professional categories
Authority to
give orders and
supervise
Ability to use a great part of ones
knowledge in other organizations
Low High
High Managers
Professionals
Low
Of ce workers
Technical
workers
Craftsmen
Source: S.R. Barley (1992, p. 13).
Knowledge workers 39
of organizational roles; thus engineers from the white- collar group are
defned to a greater extent in relation to and by diferentiation from
managers (Whalley, 1986). They are often in strong opposition to
the management, and manifest this in any way possible, for example
through the dismissal of the displays of the managerial professional
culture (Jemielniak, 2007b; Prager, 1999; Strannegrd and Friberg,
2001).
Taking into account that the technical professions are, according
to some, an avant- garde of organizational transformation (Bell, 1973;
Mallet, 1975), it is clear that the distinction between a professional and
a manager, as described earlier, is highly visible to those in the technical
professions. This book tackles only engineers (mainly software engineers,
to be exact) who perform intellectual work, and hence it covers mainly
white- collar specialists, and to a much lesser extent technicians. Software
engineers may well be a key professional group that should be analyzed in
the study of knowledge workers.
Owing to the organizational and social transformation processes
described, knowledge workers, who include the high- tech engineers
studied, escape an unequivocal classifcation as professionals, but neither
do they ft the features typical for craftwork (Table 4. 4). There are at least
a few tendencies among professions in the IT industry. Some groups try to
increase their professional elitism, but some also act contrarily, even trying
to pauperize high- tech employees. For instance, in the US in 1998, thanks
to a group of Microsoft employees, WashTech (Washington Alliance
of Technology Workers) was established. Following a merger with the
Communications Workers of America, the largest communications and
media union, the group now has 700,000 members, calls actively for new
members and also appears in industry papers (Blain, 2001). Candidates
are encouraged to join (original formatting):
1
Myth: Unions are for blue- collar workers
Reality: The problems facing IT workers arent so diferent from other
parts of the work forcelong hours, poor benefts, limited job security, and
career immobility. The number of white- collar professionals in unions has
beenincreasing steadily over the last several decades. Engineers at Lockheed-
Martin and Boeing, researchers holding advanced degrees at the University
of California, and professional airline pilots are some examples. Even
medical doctors have started their own union, to act collectively in negotia-
tions withHMOs. As the high- tech economy slumps and mega- mergers rise,
high- tech workers need the collective power of a union to make sure their
interests are represented. IT unions also fnd common cause with other trade
unions across the country, and work together to fght for the rights of all
employees.
40 The new knowledge workers
Table 4.4 Professionals and knowledge workers
Feature Professionals Common
performers
(craftsmen)
Engineers/
knowledge workers
Capabilities and
knowledge also
in possession of
outsiders.
Knowledge
and capabilities
protected and
of an esoteric
character.
Professional
knowledge
resources not
easily accessed
from the outside.
Basic capabilities
and knowledge
widely accessible,
though advanced
or precision
usage rare.
Knowledge
and capabilities
protected, but
of an esoteric
character.
Occasionally
amateurs can
possess them.
Weight
on formal
education.
High usually
specialist
bachelors and/or
masters degree is
required.
Lowpossible
apprenticeship
required.
Usually higher
education required,
though not always a
specialist one.
Weight on on-
the- job
training.
Low useful, but
of a secondary
aspect.
The highest
how apprentices
learn the job.
High often
indicated as
particularly
important.
Intellectual and
also manual
aspect of work
balance.
Mostly analytical
and intellectual
work.
Mostly manual
work.
Very important
intellectual aspect,
but also has
presence of manual
aspects.
Professional
organizations.
Development
of associations
(often licensing
with professional
access), industry
magazines, and
others.
Trade unions rare
and uncommon.
Associations rare,
industry magazines
popular.
Necessary to
have formal job
certifcates?
Yes. No. Very rare.
Access-
controlled jobs.
High. Low. Low.
Source: S.R. Barley (1992, p. 14).
Knowledge workers 41
It is surprising to what extent militant rhetoric has found a place in the
high- tech industry (commonly perceived as diametrically diferent from
the realities of the old economy), among highly paid white- collars.
In any given case, the development of the trade union does not follow
that of a professional association, which monitors work standards and
limits job access. Rather, this is a classic body representating workers
in collective bargaining with the employer(s). In the short term, without
a doubt, the development of trade unions helps in a battle to improve
working conditions and get better pay and working hours, as well as
improved job security (Jaarsveld, 2004). It should be noted though that, at
the same time, this is a very hazardous step as regards the professionaliza-
tion of high- tech jobs. It openly contradicts that process, making it very
dif cult simultaneously to maintain both the image of an elite, based on
individual capabilities, aptitudes and specialist professional knowledge,
and the picture of the membership of an occupation that holds power over
the employer based on the sheer number of associated members.
Thus, the ever more visible advance towards elitism and professional-
ism by programmers and, more broadly, IT engineers (Adams, 2007) that
has taken place in recent years should surprise no one. However, even that
process does not run on parallel lines in every country. There are diferent
tendencies and aspirations visible in the case of each competing profes-
sional association (Ensmenger, 2001).
There is no doubt that a broad understanding of the terms profession
and professional frequently encompasses knowledge workers as well,
and the literature on the professionalization process can be useful in that
analysis. It is worth noting however that there are diferences and warn-
ings as indicated above, and as also suggested by, among others, Mats
Alvesson (2004). He criticizes the traditional professional literature (defn-
ing it as narrow and idealistic), but he also emphasizes the open character
of many knowledge- intensive professions, as opposed to the classic profes-
sions, which try to limit access to the performance of work falling within
the competence in question to the members of the professional association
or those in possession of formal education in a given area. One of the most
important diferences between of ce professionals and knowledge workers
is their approach to formalities and bureaucracy.
NOTE
1. Quote taken from: http://www.washtech.org/about/mythsandrealities.php (accessed 17
June 2010).